TheRPGSite

Fuck 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.

Setting isn't enough. It takes a game masters that is able to make the game world seem alive instead of on some static path towards whatever he came up with before the beginning.

Quote from: Cranewings;327945Setting isn't enough. It takes a game masters that is able to make the game world seem alive instead of on some static path towards whatever he came up with before the beginning.

"Canon lawyers" and lazy DMs who always play railroad type campaigns, can destroy the excitement for a setting very quickly.

Quote from: One Horse Town;327943Fuck system.

TBH, Ii think the divide between the two is greatly overblown.

If you have a game system where you require multiple sword hits to take anyone out, then that fact *is* a part of the setting.

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'd go one step further and say its the setting and the participation in that setting of all of the players at the table that achieve immersion. No amount of effort and genius by the DM is going to work when the other players are talking about boobs, Mountain Dew, and making Charlie the Unicorn cracks the whole session.

Quote from: ggroy;327947"Canon lawyers" and lazy DMs who always play railroad type campaigns, can destroy the excitement for a setting very quickly.

This is also true.

I 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.

In my opinion, setting and system are equally important. I tend to put more attention to systems than to settings, but that's me, a personal preference. And the more the system supports the setting, the better.

Quote from: jadrax;327949TBH, Ii think the divide between the two is greatly overblown.

If you have a game system where you require multiple sword hits to take anyone out, then that fact *is* a part of the setting.

Yes and yes.

Quote from: ggroy;327947"Canon lawyers" and lazy DMs who always play railroad type campaigns, can destroy the excitement for a setting very quickly.

And this is one of reasons (but there are others) why I think that, even more important than setting and system, the cornerstone of roleplaying fun is people, that is, a good GM and good players. You can have your favorite system and setting, but if the people you play with suck, the game will inevitably suck. The opposite is not inevitably true.

True immersion is something I've rarely been able to achieve as a player. The few times I experienced it, it was because of the people involved in the game. Most of the time any immersion I might achieve is broken by the other players at the table.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;327964True immersion is something I've rarely been able to achieve as a player. The few times I experienced it, it was because of the people involved in the game. Most of the time any immersion I might achieve is broken by the other players at the table.

I tend to achieve moments of what I would term true immersion at least a few times a session, although it is rare it will last a considerable amount of time.

When I GM, its trickier, as you always have to basically multitask to a far greater extent.

Quote from: jadrax;327968I tend to achieve moments of what I would term true immersion at least a few times a session, although it is rare it will last a considerable amount of time.

When I GM, its trickier, as you always have to basically multitask to a far greater extent.

That hadn't occurred to me. I was thinking more along the lines of immersion maintained over a significant period of time. Moments of immersion do happen a lot more often.

Quote from: One Horse Town;327943Sure, 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.

One could run a game set in the era of The Three Musketeers using AD&D plus the setting book A Mighty Fortress, but the fencing rules in Flashing Blades do a much better job of capturing the feel of swashbuckling swordplay.

So those "one or two mechanics" can actually make a big diffence in bringing the setting to life.

Quote from: Claudius;327961In my opinion, setting and system are equally important. I tend to put more attention to systems than to settings, but that's me, a personal preference. And the more the system supports the setting, the better.


Yes and yes.


And this is one of reasons (but there are others) why I think that, even more important than setting and system, the cornerstone of roleplaying fun is people, that is, a good GM and good players. You can have your favorite system and setting, but if the people you play with suck, the game will inevitably suck. The opposite is not inevitably true.

Yes, a good GM and good players trumps everything. But that isn't a very useful direction for the conversation unless it is followed by " and this is how you can become a good GM and a good player" as it leave us average to mediocre roleplayers out in the cold.  

As for the orignal topic, they both matter. As a player I guess setting matters more as long as the GM is willing to take care of the rules for me. On the other hand if I don't care for the setting, the best rules in the world are not going to help.  

When I GM I want rules that support my play style. Even if I am drawn to a setting but don't like the system I just won't bother, I know from experience it is simply not be sustainable. If I am really keen I might try converting it to FUDGE although to be honest even that never quite works either. There is something about conversion rules that just takes the shine out of the game.

Yes.

• People
• Snacks
• Setting
• System

in that order.

Quote from: Soylent Green;327980Yes, a good GM and good players trumps everything. But that isn't a very useful direction for the conversation unless it is followed by " and this is how you can become a good GM and a good player" as it leave us average to mediocre roleplayers out in the cold.

You become a good GM or player the same way you become good at anything: by dedicated practice over time where you push your abilities and are willing to fail, and by caring about how well you do.


If you make little or no effort and don't really give a shit, then yes, the session will be crap as a game session. As mentioned earlier, if the players are talking about boobs and Mountain Dew - well, that's neither effort nor caring. So they're crap as gamers, just as a tennis player who sits around drinking beer and won't go on the court is a crap tennis player.

People, snacks, setting, system.

Quote from: Monster Manuel;327957The system can screw up the setting though.

It can screw up immersion in the setting if the system is constantly in your face. Which is why fancy doo-dads and little gimmicky mechanics get in the way of playing the game.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;327989People, snacks, setting, system.

I 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.

Quote from: One Horse Town;327991It can screw up immersion in the setting if the system is constantly in your face. Which is why fancy doo-dads and little gimmicky mechanics get in the way of playing the game.

One might almost say that it's a good idea to choose mechanics that support your preferred gaming agenda, in fact.

Quote from: Thanlis;327995One might almost say that it's a good idea to choose mechanics that support your preferred gaming agenda, in fact.

System doesn't matter - setting does. Try reading.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;327989If you make little or no effort and don't really give a shit, then yes, the session will be crap as a game session. As mentioned earlier, if the players are talking about boobs and Mountain Dew - well, that's neither effort nor caring.

This always happens when several players are always drunk or stoned during the game.

Quote from: The Shaman;327975One could run a game set in the era of The Three Musketeers using AD&D plus the setting book A Mighty Fortress, but the fencing rules in Flashing Blades do a much better job of capturing the feel of swashbuckling swordplay.

So those "one or two mechanics" can actually make a big diffence in bringing the setting to life.

I remember I was talking once to a friend about how much I felt that the system matters. Let's imagine your character is surprised by a guy who points at you with a crossbow. In AD&D (when this conversation took place there was no D&D3 yet), unless my character had a very low level, I'd laugh at the crossbow guy and rush to him in order to kick his ass. In RuneQuest, I'd shout something like 'I surrender! Please, don't hurt me!'

So yes, a really big difference.

Regarding your example, I couldn't play in a swashbukling game using AD&D and take it seriously. I'd laugh my ass all the time at the silliness. Flashing Blades, or Capitán Alatriste, are the way to go.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;327989Yes.

• People
• Snacks
• Setting
• System

in that order.

For me it's:

• People and a good place
• System and setting (can't decide which one is more important, as they complement each other)
• Food and booze

I am having a hard time reconciling this:

Quote from: One Horse Town;327991It can screw up immersion in the setting if the system is constantly in your face. Which is why fancy doo-dads and little gimmicky mechanics get in the way of playing the game.

With this:

Quote from: One Horse Town;327998System doesn't matter - setting does.

You may need to explain yourself more.

Quote from: Soylent Green;327980Yes, a good GM and good players trumps everything. But that isn't a very useful direction for the conversation unless it is followed by " and this is how you can become a good GM and a good player" as it leave us average to mediocre roleplayers out in the cold.

It's not that easy to give advice about how to become a good player or a good GM, but I think there are two golden rules:

• Don't be an asshole
• Common sense

What jadrax said.

"System can't help, it can only get in the way?"

Quote from: Thanlis;328009What jadrax said.

"System can't help, it can only get in the way?"

Not in all cases. System can help a lot. But I admit that's a question of taste, some people feel that way, such people usually like systems like BRP and Unisystem, which they feel "get out of the way".

Some people, like me, prefer systems that support setting.

Quote from: One Horse Town;327943Sure, 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.

Well 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

Setting and system, just like good company and basic listening skills, are tools that provide entertainment at the game table. They help each other and combine to provide a greater game experience for everyone involved. This is one of those things where the whole ends up superior to the sum of its parts, in that regard.

Moreover. I believe the degree of immersion/believability in the game mostly depends on the people gathered around the game table, their personal goals regarding their participation in the game, and their relative synergies. If you don't have the right type of people (i.e. proactive, constructive, cooperative people who are interested in immersion and helping others enjoy the game as they do), everything else will fail.

Or, in other words: People, Snacks, Setting and System. The Cheetoist way for you.

Quote from: One Horse Town;327991It can screw up immersion in the setting if the system is constantly in your face. Which is why fancy doo-dads and little gimmicky mechanics get in the way of playing the game.

Ok, this is obviously a rant, but can you give an example of gimmicky mechanics that screw up the setting, so I know how much I agree?

Quote from: Monster Manuel;328026Ok, this is obviously a rant, but can you give an example of gimmicky mechanics that screw up the setting, so I know how much I agree?

How about the jacked up laws of magic Margret Wies wrote for the 1e Dragon Lance book?

Quote from: Cranewings;328027How about the jacked up laws of magic Margret Wies wrote for the 1e Dragon Lance book?

Dragonlance sucked. Badly. A good example of what you shouldn't do.


And yet, same person went on to inspire Ravenloft.... go figure.

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.

Um, IMO what is commonly referred to as a Campaign Setting is actually part of the game system.  If it wasn't, then it would just be description.  Creating description is hardly the point of the game in an RPG.  Bluntly, I can fart to give a description.  The actual setting is really the game designer's verbal or visual clue to the underlying relationships / rules being used.  In the end, if it doesn't have a rule attached, it's not part of the game and is utterly irrelevant.  In other words, don't include it when describing the game rules, so as not to confuse the players.