Quote from: David R;328018Well it's not really that setting matters, but rather the ability of the GM. So it should be GM matters. Of course a lot depends on how players react to this sort of thing. Are they mostly on the same page. So, it's people who you game with matters.

Regards,
David R

There is truth in that.  Really, splitting hairs over the relative importance of this or that element are not that constructive.  All are important to greater or lesser degree depending on the inclination and abilities of those involved.

My analogy for System is that of a referee in a sporting event. If they are doing their job right you shouldn't even notice them.  System is there to enable play, running quietly in the background.  Elements of the sytem which the players consciously use should be simple and not interrupt the flow of the game.  There is nothing worse than the flow of the game breaking down as people hunt down or argue rules over something that should be easily resolved.

Quote from: Nazgul;328030bullshit...

Fuck You.

Quote from: jadrax;327993I would probably expand snacks to surroundings. I.e. you need to be in a place where you are comfortable and free of distractions (like hunger) to achieve immersion.

Certainly. But immersion is not necessary to a good game session.

I'm most interested in what makes people say, "that was fun," and call or email the next day to thank me for running the session, and want to come again. For some that may be immersion, for others something else.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;328153Certainly. But immersion is not necessary to a good game session.

I'm most interested in what makes people say, "that was fun," and call or email the next day to thank me for running the session, and want to come again. For some that may be immersion, for others something else.

Tbh, If I am hungry and uncomfortable I am unlikely to achieve fun while playing an RPG either. But, Yes, I accept your point.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;328153Certainly. But immersion is not necessary to a good game session.

I'm most interested in what makes people say, "that was fun," and call or email the next day to thank me for running the session, and want to come again. For some that may be immersion, for others something else.

Sure, if your only priority is getting together and having fun with your friends, you can all get wasted on Foster's Lager, eventually forget about what you were doing and spend the evening playing Wii with your buddies till you puke; and you might end up saying "last night was great fun!".  But then you weren't really roleplaying, right?

Meanwhile, over in the Land of Actually Focusing On The RPG, Immersion is definitely one of the things that is important to having a good GAME session, as opposed to having a good time at a social event that happened to include a game session as an excuse.

RPGPundit

Quote from: jadrax;328159Tbh, If I am hungry and uncomfortable I am unlikely to achieve fun while playing an RPG either.

Which is why I put snacks about setting and system.

But yes, the general environment must be conducive to the mood of the game you're after. For example, tv in background, screaming kid, stinking hot day with no fan, etc. I tend to take that as given, but I probably shouldn't. It's just that I normally host, so the general environment is okay - so I take it for granted. But you're right that I shouldn't.

Quote from: RPGPundit;328182Sure, if your only priority is getting together and having fun with your friends, you can all get wasted on Foster's Lager, eventually forget about what you were doing and spend the evening playing Wii with your buddies till you puke; and you might end up saying "last night was great fun!".  But then you weren't really roleplaying, right?

Don't be deliberately obtuse. It's plain that I meant having fun with a roleplaying game. You could tell by the way I mentioned "a good game session." Otherwise setting and system wouldn't be third and fourth on my list, they wouldn't be there at all.

OHT, main problem I find with your OP is that setting usually means "GM's work." So your statement could be translated as "GM matters" as the setting is something subjective, based on the work that the GM does to convey the flavor of it. Heck, it could be more precisely said that "group matters" for that.

System is objective (at least when rules are known and agreed by everyone), and definitely impacts the setting.

For me what's important is "is what my character doing at this exact minute interesting." If the answer is no, I really could care less if there is an awesome setting describing the context of all of the boring errands the GM is sending me on.

So for me probably what matters the most would be:

1. GM
2. The other players
3. System
...
42. The setting.

System matters in that a) it arbitrates actions and b) good rules mechanics (some might say clever or even gimmicky) enhance the setting and work to set the tone - such as a Poker based magic system in Deadlands. Indie games seem to attempt to do this, whether they succeed or whether they come off as pretentious is in the eye of the beholder.

Quote from: One Horse Town;327943Fuck system.

Sure, one or two mechanics emulating the setting and genre you are attempting can aid immersion, but ultimately, it's the setting as laid out by the GM/DM that is the primary source of immersion.

The sense of a world beyond your character, meaning they are a part of something bigger. That is a better aid to immersion than a squillion systemic doo-dads.

I am utterly surprised by this statement - no, not by this statement per se, but by this statement coming from you, of all people.

Do you really think and believe that the Stone Horizons setting, played with OD&D or GURPS, gives a similar experience to Stone Horizons, played with your system that we had the pleasure to witness being finely crafted and refined in this very forum?

I am so looking forward to this game, the single best thing ever to emerge from this forum, and now you tell me that I don't need to bother with your game and just use any other game system that I am already familiar with, and just use the setting bits (which are, as far as we have seen, deeply ingrained in the crunch and tables of the rules)?

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;328264I am so looking forward to this game, the single best thing ever to emerge from this forum, and now you tell me that I don't need to bother with your game and just use any other game system that I am already familiar with, and just use the setting bits (which are, as far as we have seen, deeply ingrained in the crunch and tables of the rules)?

No, that's not it, and i may have been unclear on that. I am saying that mechanics that emulate genre can help immersion in the game, but what the players (and especially the GM) bring to the table in the way of immersion in the setting is more important than the kind of system that system matters proponents advocate, which force you down a cul-de-sac with few options - which is immersion breaking.

Quote from: Monster Manuel;327957I think that system should try not to contradict setting, and possibly make certain things easier, then get out of the way. I do agree that setting it more important. The system can screw up the setting though.

For example, if the setting says that something is common- say artificers, but the system makes it hard for them to exist because of onerous crafting rules, then there's a problem with the system.

MM and I were speaking about this in another post.  And I see Claudius and others saying things similar to what I feel about this.  

I spend time in other sites helping people build their setttings, and rule 1 in this is, "Make sure the system you choose matches the game you want to play and the setting you are creating, because eventually the game and setting WILL match the ruleset."

It is one of the biggest mistakes a GM can make.  Don't try to run a social heavy game with a ruleset that is 90% encounter biased.  Don't try to run a gritty, down to earth, deadly game with an explosive power growth curve.  

At the same time, for most campaigns (not one-shots or short games), the system is the physics of the world, and can make the internal consistency happen in a setting.  Internal consistency is the currency of Immersion, in game terms.  This determines, to a large degree, the amount of work a player has to put in to properly immerse themselves.  It sounds like your player is saying the same thing.  

Choosing the right people is the first thing (as Kyle mentions), and it is wonderful when we have that option.  And I wish we were all perfect as GMs, but we can only be as good as we canbe.  But System and Setting are the two things most in our control.  And they either make the game or ruin it together.

Quote from: LordVreeg;328295I spend time in other sites helping people build their setttings, and rule 1 in this is, "Make sure the system you choose matches the game you want to play and the setting you are creating, because eventually the game and setting WILL match the ruleset."

I have played a lot of none D&D settings run in to troubles because they have been shoehorned into D20, which did not really suite them. (Lone Wolf and Conan both come to mind).

I'm a little unclear.  We go from "mattering" to "aiding immersion" without any segueway to explain how they're treated as if they're the same thing.

I mean, I think I agree with the basic premise; I've played essentially the same game in multiple systems and had pretty much the same result.  System doesn't matter nearly as much as the "System matters" crowd says it does... at least not to me.  But I'm getting sidetracked by this "aiding immersion" thing.