Quote from: Jason D;843292That said, an exploration book would be a great addition to Call of Cthulhu

   Well, there's Mythos Expeditions for Trail of Cthulhu.

Quote from: Jason D;843292That said, an exploration book would be a great addition to Call of Cthulhu, along with a book focusing on cryptid-hunting for the Royal Geographical Society at the turn of the century.

You tell me? I've been tangling with the idea of running a Lost City of Z scenario for CoC for over a year now, and it's the lack of wilderness travel and survival rules that's been staying my hand.

I'm slowly but surely scraping something together, though. Something big, actually. Wonder if anyone at Chaosium would be interested?

I had high hopes for Raiders of R'lyeh, but... erm... wonder how Quentin's doing these days?

Quote from: ThatChrisGuy;841916I've always found it funny that the characters are always overdressed on the covers of Mars books.  Six square inches of cloth is just way too much.

As an rpg cover that picture would cause SO much shit to the hit the fan. But it would be hilarious to watch.

Quote from: The Butcher;844052Wonder if anyone at Chaosium would be interested?

I am pretty sure that they would definitely be interested.

Quote from: AsenRG;841858What, I'm supposed to care what someone else gains on a meta level?
Screw that noise! I'm grabbing 0-3 extra dice, depending on how important it is to the character, and the GM can have all the Threat rules award for this!

Anyone who spares the time to even think about it isn't immersed enough, at least in my book. Which is fine if immersion isn't your goal, of course!
But if it's not, why are you complaining about narrative mechanics?

Immersion is a tricky term. It means different things to different to different people.

Quote from: Nexus;844173Immersion is a tricky term. It means different things to different to different people.

Indeed.

Quote from: Nexus;844173Immersion is a tricky term. It means different things to different to different people.

In a general sense, it means the same experience though.  The whole "you can't define immersion" thing is more of a rhetorical/semantic trick on the part of anti-immersionist storygamers than anything else.

If handing dice to the GM in exchange for extra effort doesn't harm immersion, then neither does anything a GM might do behind the screen in a traditional RPG.

E.g. GM doesn't count HP of enemies, just has them fall over when he feels like it? Player who suspects this isn't immersed enough.

GM has NPC A turn out to be the bad guy because players guessed it was NPC B early in the session, and the players smell something fishy? Not immersed enough.

GM has NPC B turn out to be the bad buy because the session reaching a conclusion and it makes a good twist, but players smell something fishy? Not immersed enough.

And so on. Play however you like but there's a clear and well-articulated reason why mechanics such as these are detrimental to sense of in-character POV, just as GMing advice that calls for behind-the-scenes manipulation does.

Quote from: RPGPundit;844640In a general sense, it means the same experience though.  The whole "you can't define immersion" thing is more of a rhetorical/semantic trick on the part of anti-immersionist storygamers than anything else.

  I don't think the definition is the issue, but rather that, as a fundamentally subjective experience, what contributes to or detracts from it can differ--not to mention the degree of importance people attach to it.

Quote from: RPGPundit;844640In a general sense, it means the same experience though.  The whole "you can't define immersion" thing is more of a rhetorical/semantic trick on the part of anti-immersionist storygamers than anything else.

The same experience, achieved different ways.  

If we consider literature, I have had people claim that they can only be immersed in first person literature, or conversely that first person breaks them out of the immersion because it's "not what they would think or do" and it's jarring.  I've had people claim that the whaling chapters in Moby Dick add to immersion, by explaining the world, or detract from it by having nothing to do with the characters.  I have had people say that the quotes at the top of the page detract from immersion.  I have read books that question whether immersion is necessary to enjoy the book (If on a Winter's Night a Traveler is impossible to become immersed in due to the structure, and yet is an excellent novel due to this).

And this matches my experience.  I have had excellent games where we bullshitted with each other during the game, and pretty miserable games where everyone was desperately playing their character (World of Darkness can go very wrong).  I have had a person complain to me that too many skills is just "looking at sheets" or that not having skills "doesn't make sense".  

But a good standard for Rorschach words is when there are two outcomes, and one is labeled good ("immersed") and one is labeled bad ("not immersed").  Rorschach words never produce good discussion.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;844726I don't think the definition is the issue, but rather that, as a fundamentally subjective experience, what contributes to or detracts from it can differ--not to mention the degree of importance people attach to it.

The definition can be an issue and often is, but you're right otherwise. That said, if I say X mucks with immersion (implicitly: for me) it's not much help to explain away the problem by saying X is okay for your immersion.

I have to admit that I roll my eyes when someone claims that making up major elements of a scene around their character is compatible with or even enhances their immersion. But in practice that just means we don't really have much to talk about on the topic; otherwise they can rock on.

Quote from: GreyICE;844728But a good standard for Rorschach words is when there are two outcomes, and one is labeled good ("immersed") and one is labeled bad ("not immersed").  Rorschach words never produce good discussion.

When in doubt, I fall back in "in-character point of view".
If that doesn't produce understanding, if not agreement, then the other party is probably not worth talking to...about anything.

Quote from: Arminius;844715If handing dice to the GM in exchange for extra effort doesn't harm immersion, then neither does anything a GM might do behind the screen in a traditional RPG.

And if handing the dice to the GM does harm immersion?

Quote from: Arminius;844731The definition can be an issue and often is, but you're right otherwise. That said, if I say X mucks with immersion (implicitly: for me) it's not much help to explain away the problem by saying X is okay for your immersion.

Agreed.

Quote from: Arminius;844733When in doubt, I fall back in "in-character point of view".
If that doesn't produce understanding, if not agreement, then the other party is probably not worth talking to...about anything.

My most charitable reading of some comments about what does not harm immersion is that the other party means something that has nothing to do with "in-character point of view" but instead means something like being immersed in the setting or scene in the same way that some people really like the set, design, and effects in a film like Bladerunner or that for them "immersion" = enjoying the adventure in some general way.

Quote from: Arminius;844731The definition can be an issue and often is, but you're right otherwise. That said, if I say X mucks with immersion (implicitly: for me) it's not much help to explain away the problem by saying X is okay for your immersion.

I have to admit that I roll my eyes when someone claims that making up major elements of a scene around their character is compatible with or even enhances their immersion. But in practice that just means we don't really have much to talk about on the topic; otherwise they can rock on.

One of the problems with describing immersion is you have to determine immersion into what?  For some it means immersion into character, or in-character point of view.  For others it's immersing into a story, the same way they immerse into a novel or book, seeing their character as third-person character.  Others get immersed into the mechanics, either the tactics of the combat system or some other mechanic (one guy on awfulpurple I remember saying he really was "immersed" by Dogs in the Vineyard because he really got into (like almost being "hypnotized") by the back and forth of the betting and raising mechanics).

Regardless of what type of immersion you like, or don't like, there are games that allow you to immerse into whatever you feel like (the older, "incoherent" games that are the most popular as anyone can play them) and those that mechanically support a specific type of immersion (namely mechanical or story) by forcing you to immerse in those ways that end up actively inhibiting immersion into character.

The 2d20 system actively forces immersion into story through mechanics, thus actively inhibiting in-character immersion by definition.  Because making a decision as Robert E. Howard is not making a decision as Conan.

Quote from: Bren;844734And if handing the dice to the GM does harm immersion?

Then awareness of behind-the-screen manipulation definitely should. Because handing the dice is just a formal mechanic for GM manipulation.

QuoteMy most charitable reading of some comments about what does not harm immersion is that the other party means something that has nothing to do with "in-character point of view" but instead means something like being immersed in the setting or scene in the same way that some people really like the set, design, and effects in a film like Bladerunner or that for them "immersion" = enjoying the adventure in some general way.

This all falls under definition. It's easily handled by specifying IC-POV when there's any doubt.