Feeble attempt at defining immersion

[contracycle]

Fine.  Subsequent comments suggest to me that we REALLY need to abandon the term as it exists in the demotic today.

My use of it is really specific: "Its that weird shit that Mary Kuhner described on RGFA which was raised as an issue precisely because it was distinct from routine suspension of disbelief."

[contracycle]

It's funny that you say call it "an exterme form of the RP phenomenon", though, since personally I don't think I even could do live-roleplaying in any other way - or, in a sense, even tabletop roleplaying. Must be a cultural and learned thing.

Hmm, possibly... Mary Kuhner seemed to do it a lot, something like 75% of play IIRC.  I have done it on "the odd occassion".  If you are really doing it All The Time, then I would think that it is a learned behaviour of some kind.  Which is interesting.

But I disagree very strongly that you can't do Live RP any other way; you most certainly can do it with routine "suspension of disbelief" and identification with the character.  That is NOT the trance-like state I mean.

[Merten]

Hmm, possibly... Mary Kuhner seemed to do it a lot, something like 75% of play IIRC.  I have done it on "the odd occassion".  If you are really doing it All The Time, then I would think that it is a learned behaviour of some kind.  Which is interesting.

I think we are, perhaps, making the whole immersion-issue a bit too big and somehow removing it from the original context of roleplaying.

As I see it (though your and other peoples mileage may, and most probably will, be different), immersion is something that already a part of the roleplaying experience itself. It might be that the "depth" or "strenght" of immersion varies depending on playing style and preferences, but it's there. I would go as far as to define one aspect of roleplaying being immersion - you pretend being someone else, somewhere else. You, most probably, come up with some kind of visualisation from the descriptions the GM gives, and that's already immersion.

But I disagree very strongly that you can't do Live RP any other way; you most certainly can do it with routine "suspension of disbelief" and identification with the character.  That is NOT the trance-like state I mean.

Well, if we define Immersion as "total immersion, that trance-like state where you are or very strongly try to be someone else, thinking like your character does, seeing what he sees, et cetera", then yeah - I agree. There are lot's of ways to live-roleplaying, as there are lot's of ways doing roleplaying in general.

If we define (just for this short moment ;) ) immersion as something I just said, then I disagree - immersion is a vital component of roleplaying.

I just meant that I can't do it without "deep immersion" - it's probably my shortcoming, though personally I see it as result of having been in too many good games (judged by my limited experiences and preferences on what makes a good game). It takes only Vampire live-game and it's meta-level to bring me back to the painfull reality of abstract rules and Out Of Character discussions. Of course, some people prefer that kind of gaming, which is okay. It's just me (and bunch of others) who doesen't like it.

But who's Mary Kuhner? Never heard.

[contracycle]

someone who posted to rec.games.frp.advocacy some years ago.

It is becuause immersion has become defined as the imaginative commitment that I think is confusing.  I do not, at least, think of immersion on those terms; or more accurately, I do think the phenomenon originally termed immersion is a far end of the spectrum of degrees of imaginative investment.

[contracycle]

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=0008D31F-BD5B-1C6F-84A9809EC588EF21&pageNumber=1&catID=2

For reference, a Scientific American article on hyptnotism, including thr following note as an image caption:

IT DOESN'T TAKE MUCH to induce hypnosis: staring fixedly at a spot on the wall and listening to the soothing voice of a hypnotist will do the trick for most people.

[Wart]

That's one of the reasons why I forbid players to roleplay evil characters. A former friend of mine regularly roleplayed evil characters and I think that experience changed or warped his personality. He's now no longer a friend. One is what what one thinks.

I'd be inclined to think that there may have been tendencies already there which roleplaying the evil characters managed to unleash, but he was your friend so you'd know better.

[M. J. Young]

I look forward to Ron's list.

I find it interesting that in response to the suggested compromise, Contracycle saw it as too broad; I, on the other hand, thought it too narrow--I think there is a real place for the same sort of "immersion" that occurs in chess and pinochle, in which the player is deeply engrossed in the tactical/strategic aspects of the game even if this is not how his character would be perceived. For one thing, I have played my share of professional soldier types, and I am not a professional soldier. What my character would do without a second thought may take me quite a bit of careful consideration to produce--thus I may be so focused on details precisely because the character is not, yet I am certainly "immersed" in the game and in the character, in a certain sense.

But I'll wait for the list.

--M. J. Young

[lumpley]

In the way-immersive games I've played, you got pretty extensive Director power when you were in character.  Thus:

Me: "I walk through the hallway.  Murray's there."

Murray's player: "I am?  Musta finished what I was working on in my room."

Thought it'd be worth mentioning.

-Vincent