D&D discussion: Immersion vs Abstraction

[Arc Vembris]

Mearls' latest Legends and Lore article suggest that editions of D&D exists on a grid not unlike the alignment grid: Immersion vs Abstraction, Story vs Strategy. He describes it better

Mike Mearls

Just as you can peg your tastes in D&D to the chart, you can also map the modes that a given version of D&D best supports. 2nd Edition was big on immersion and story, with little emphasis on tactics until later in the edition. 3rd Edition emphasized tactics but it did account for story; its rules also tended more toward immersion than abstraction. 4th Edition has a big focus on tactics and abstraction, while 1st Edition favored abstraction and story.

My memory of 2nd ed involves a lot of challenges of how quickly we could fast-talk the DM into believing our ideas. We were able to do anything we could imagine, so long as he took us at our word and didn't doom us with a horribly fickle die roll. I loved the shift in 3e of providing distinct rules for doing things that we no longer had to describe. Thinking on it today, it seemed to me that there are far fewer powers in 4e that affect the environment: things that appear on the battlefield don't appear from the battlefield, they're conjurations of spirit or energy or force that disappear once the encounter is over at the latest. Now of course creative players and generous DMs can bend the rules any way they like, but that doesn't describe the system itself. Terrain Powers go a long way to fixing problems like I'm describing, but it's a short list to describe the infinite.

I love dynamic battles and out-of-the-box solutions, and maybe they just require more DM setup. What do you think?  

[Raganui Minamoto]

I'm currently in a ADnD game over skype with some people from /tg/ and I AM LOVING IT. As you said, it's really about how quickly you can get your DM to believe what you're doing (mostly outside of combat) over rolling for everything. I like it better that way, cause less chance of being thoroughly screwed out of awesome moments by bad dice rolls.  

[Arc Vembris]

The big risk there is being screwed by a bad DM, though once you've dodged that it's pretty good.  

[Raganui Minamoto]

Agreed. Though, a bad DM can ruin any game. Even if they're actually trying to be a good DM. Though for people like that (aka, me for example), I hope that the players at least try to help with constructive criticism and not just have your character jump off a cliff.  

[Arc Vembris]

A sufficiently bad DM can, but systems that have a stronger foundation of rules have a greater tolerance for poor DMing, and good DMs don't frequently grow on trees. They certainly didn't when I was playing 2nd ed.  

[Raganui Minamoto]

Heh. Yea, I got a good one. Level 4, got +1 fieldplate (with resistance to breakage), and a +3 medium shield. I'm glad I decided to take a specialization in my battleaxe instead of increasing my military fork's proficiency. Plus, the group is pretty fun(ny) and haven't had any problems so far. Though, my dwarf is starting to get annoyed that this random group of people has started following him (though he won't turn down the help).  

[Laertes Ursus]

As the editions march on, I've been noticing a lot more unification of the system and a lot less YMMV. Certainly, a terrible DM can ruin a game, regardless of edition, but you're beginning to need an epic DM less and less as it goes to have a truly enjoyable game, and it's becoming a lot more forgiving for mediocre DMs.

 

[Seiryna]

Laertes Ursus

As the editions march on, I've been noticing a lot more unification of the system and a lot less YMMV. Certainly, a terrible DM can ruin a game, regardless of edition, but you're beginning to need an epic DM less and less as it goes to have a truly enjoyable game, and it's becoming a lot more forgiving for mediocre DMs.

The problem with this is most mediocre DMs don't know how to deal with out-of-the-box solutions. if it isn't in the rule book(s) you can't do it, if it is in the rule books you have to do it EXACTLY how its written in the rule books~
An epic DM knows when/where and how to apply the rules in a book as mere guidelines, and when to give players the freedom to make/do out-of-the-box solutions to problems. but thats just my thoughts on the matter~ noone has to/or prolly will agree with me, but that's fine lol.

Back on topic sorta~ I love immersion and story. I am one of those people that have to know everything and ask like 50 questions before I do anything. last I checked D&D was Role playing game not a Roll playing game~ so while I do like the dice for somethings just cause of the randomness of them, I try not to rely on them.
I once had a game where a single diplomacy check of mine lasted around 5 hours real time~ it was an intense negotiation. Now I know not all DMs can be like this, but still when you can be beaten just cause a dice roll, no matter how good you RP it does just seem to take all the fun out of the game~ at least for me.