Immersion, or not, in 40K from 8th Edition

[Khornestar]

What's your podcast called?

[Warhead01]

This is the only place I can think to place this, so if a Mod thinks it deserves a topic, please, feel free to split.

 

Does anybody else wonder at the lack of immersion evident in the new edition from what we've been told?

 

From a  personal point of view, 40k has always been about being a part of the battle, rather than just directing/controlling it.  Feeling like you are on the ground making the decisions, dodging incoming fire, and either making an epic kill or being the epic kill.

 

Now, though, the abstraction has taken over, and we are left with a Chess-like game, with better representations of the pieces on a different style board.

 

Vehicles no longer feel like vehicles, rather than using pistols in close combat like previously, you can now fire them in the shooting phase while locked in combat, unless your opponent has fled the combat and left you with a massive target on your head, and the return of primarchs leave characters like chapter masters as little more than custodians (not the gold guys) until another primarch returns to take control.

 

The realism coupled with futuristic weaponry and nigh-unkillable mechanical behemoths was one of the things that drew me to 40k after discovering the setting via Space Crusade.

 

Don't get me wrong, please, I'm not trying to put a negative tone on anything here, I'm trying to find out.

 

Should speed of games come at a sacrifice to what was an immeasurably fun, immersive gaming experience, that I have found nowhere else in rival companies?

No, not really. I've never felt that immersion your talking about. To me this is once again a Dawn of War edition . I enjoy the armies and the problem solving. 40K is a big moving puzzle with layers.  I don't like Special characters I don't like how in my face GW has made them the last few editions. HQ's are usually the least important part to my armies and I've often wished I didn't have to take them. My usual is a Warboss who's utilitarian and stays more or less out of the way so he doesn't die immediately.

I like'd him safe in the Green Tide when he could be useful. 

I really like support type characters for my first Legion and my Space Wolves. I'll take Psykers over most anything else any day. I hold no attachment to them on the table top. I think I enjoy them more when I'm painting them. After that meh. I think if I was actually interested in Immersion I'd play Necromunda or SW-A. It's easier when you have very few mini's and they're all unique and earning XP.  

 

[Tyberos the Red Wake]

For people that have been with the franchise for a long time, it makes sense that GW's modern style will not be as immersive or nostalgic. 40K in 6E and 7E look nowhere near the same as the 40K from 3E, 4E, and even 5E. We've had the tragic loss of Wayne England, one of GW's iconic artists, and IMO the person who personified 40K aesthetics around 4E. Nowadays, 40K is all digital art and is more modern and trendy. That's just how it goes as time moves on.

 

I've disliked some of the modern lore ever since Centurion suits and the Tau never losing, beating Hive Fleets and entire Imperial Crusades, and mastering the Codex Astartes in a year or three, and murdering Chapter Masters using their own specialties and beating Khan in melee. Just ridiculous. That's the kind of new fluff GW is putting out these days. A lot of people disliked Gathering Storm for the same reason.

 

My solution to this is to stick to 30K and older eras, like M36, M32, or the campaigns from before 6E. Forge World is great for retaining the old 40K feel, although with a more historical and militaristic "realistic" vibe.

 

But at least for how the lore has suffered, we have gotten a lot of great things in other areas. Way better product selection, faster releases, a far better new management, a new edition that looks to be great, and the game itself has expanded a lot and we will have tons of options with Shadow War and 8E, tournaments are exploding in popularity. All in all, it's worth the trade off, IMO. We got so much more good than bad, and if you don't like the 999.M41 lore, you can always go backwards in time, because 40K is and always will be a setting, and not a story.

[Raven1]

I have never felt that immersion playing a competitive game. On a narrative level maybe. The games competitively needs to play like chess. Every unit needs to have a use. Strategy and tactics need to win the day not triple riptides, Taudar, or SM superfriends just riping through armies. Free points needs to be gone.

 

Now if you want play a narrative game and its a last stand againt an endless throngs of the enemy or a battle in "history" then it gets a lot more "real."

 

I have never thought at any point oh man this is so realistic because a roll a d6 to determine every little element good or bad or I won a challenge and now my Chaos Lord is a Spawn...joy...fun.

 

And to add to this. The game has changed so much in the 10 or so yeard i have been playing the game. Codexes have gained and lost units and special rules. A number of stories that grew up with in the game have been retconned. The 13th Black Crusade I participated in has been retconned. The narrative now and gameplay now is not what I started with.

[Claws and Effect]

Your immersion in the game is in no way the developer's responsibility. Simply because not everyone finds the same things to be immersive.

 

Some players like the story behind why this battle is happening and what the stakes are. Others like the strategic aspect of the game and putting their tactical mind against their opponent.

 

It is the developer's responsibility to offer a rule set that can cater to both of those player types equally well.

 

Personally, what *I* find immersion breaking is having the game screech to a halt while my opponent and I frantically flip through one of our 5 books because we disagree on how a rule should be interpreted.

 

Anything that leads to less of THAT, I'm all for.

[Bronze Beast in the Dark]

A game is a conversation using rules and dice to determine outcomes. Immersion is up to the  players.

[M@verik115]

The last time I immersed myself in 40K was in 4th edition where your army was your own. 
From 5th onward you would just play generic or web WAAC lists and 40K just lost all immersion. 
From the looks of it 8th edition might actually bring it back. 

[Xwingt65]

I'm really confused... don't you have to roll a fist full of dice when creating characters to find their base attributes?

I definitely remember doing this a few times I've been interested in RPG gaming over miniature gaming.

 

It's a little off-topic, but DnD went to a points buying mechanic for generating your initial stats decades ago.  At least it has been one of several options for a long, long, time, even if they might have still allowed rolling randomly.  Most DMs would prefer the points buying system to prevent abuse, and all players start on an even playing field.

 

One of the problems with rolling is: you make a bunch of poor rolls, and just abort that character and start over.  Might have to retry a dozen times before getting something you're satisfied with.  Other problem: wasting time by having to make all of those rolls in front of the DM to prevent cheating.  With points-buying, you just take care of it at home and show up for the game.  

 

"Most" ... this is a statement you can't back up with facts.

[Ishagu]

Immersion comes from the narrative in the player's mind, backed up by the visual representation of the armies clashing on the tabletop.

 

The rules are abstract, nothing more.

[Charlo]

 

 

The game will be just as immersive as you make it.

 

This, this, a thousand times this. Immersion, imo, is a suspension of actively thinking about mechanics and allowing imagination to take over. This is tied into how well you understand and/or like said mechanics. Of course, going from a system that one likes to another that one does not will automatically harm immersion. For some, including myself, the myriad of rules, special rules and game mechanics that made up seventh edition made the game harder to enjoy, thus breaking our own immersion. Personally, I like games that are quicker, with simpler game mechanics, in terms of wargames.

 

What about roleplaying games? Being story driven, I find it easier to immerse myself in them, even when the rulesets are magnitudes more complex or lengthy. But, still, I try to look for shortcuts in the rules, little 'hacks' for me to memorise rules and tables - all to help immerse me. I prefer to put most of my thinking into the fiction side of things, rather than dwell on crunch. 

 

Yeah Olis said it better than I could.

 

It's still the models on the table, with terrain and a board moving and rolling dice to determine the outcome of the battle.

 

Immersion is what you make it.

 

And vehicles if anything will feel more like vehicles with this new edition... As opposed to the point-sink tin cans they currently are.

[totgeboren]

I think the most immersive 40k ever was for me was during 3ed with the trial assault rules and the Cityfight codex.

Abstract movement and LOS really was great! It felt like your playing peices really was representing your soldiers, with them hugging cover, taking pot-shots and being animate. That they were mounted on a base would never give rise to a question of them being able to shoot down from the top floor at models close to the wall of the same building.

In 7ed, this is a valid issue due to true LOS.

Also, removal of templates was great, it sped thing up immensely while also reducing conflict.

I was really disappointed that they returned in 4ed.

 

The current rules make your models behave like they are static statues that you place on the table due to true LOS, and the template rules are a mess. Especially sniper barrage is just horrible.

[Slave to Darkness]

 

 

Why else do Ork players WAAAAAAGH or Space Wolf players howl when the opportunity arises?

 

 

Because they need to grow up and realize they aint kids anymore. *pushes toy soldiers around making pew pew pew noises*

 

Tbh I have not felt any Immersion in the game since 2nd ed. I think its down to what we grew up with. I felt the same way you do now when 3rd ed dropped. In another 18 or so years your kids will complain that Warhammer 40'000 super happy gogogo turbo alpha noblebright hentai gundam whooooooo edition isnt as immersive as age of girlyman.

 

My advice to you sir... Name all your Characters (hell I have named every mini in my Wolf Army) and create their legends, sagas etc. It got me through crap editions, sure the rules may not be to your liking but the end result is the same, Wolf Lord Varg Vargsonson bested Warboss Buttwobbler Deepfryah, bane of da Panzeez, krusha of Oomiez in tin kanz and Jimmy Rustler of B&C mods in single combat then cut the Blood Gerbil into his back, then holds aloft his trusty Frost Axe Nipplebane and screams (In a bad Norse accent) 'By the Ginger balls of Russ, I HAVE A FLOWER!!!.

 

The game isnt what GW make it, but what YOU make it. Dont give up heart just yet. As for dice in RPG's etc, read a system called Amber, diceless system. Its bloody awfull, a bit of randomness is a good thing.

[Slave to Darkness]

Immersion comes from the narrative in the player's mind, backed up by the visual representation of the armies clashing on the tabletop.

The rules are abstract, nothing more.

Golly gee my good sir, stop saying things I agree with!!

[Damo1701]

You don't stop playing because you grow up. You grow up because you stop playing.

 

Heck, working with kids is enough to teach me that!

 

I guess I just miss the glass-cannon effect vehicles were. Great when they worked, poor when they didn't.

[NatBrannigan]

I'm really glad my brother in law doesn't get too immersed when he's playing his Tyranids... If I see him salivating on the other side of the table now I might make a run for it!

 

I enjoy the stories that come out of games, a game I won where I had one guardsman left running for his life with the relic in hand for instance. That model now has "Pvt Perkins" painted on his base and I like looking out for him in games to see what his next heroic act will be (blown up by a poorly aimed Demolisher cannon in the last game...)!

 

Now for me, the way that my army was all killed leaving him alone doesn't matter. It doesn't mater if those Flesh Tearers had to look at a WS chart when rolling to hit or if they just hit on a 3+. And it doesn't matter to me that a vehicle had Hull points stripped away or if it lost "wounds" over the course of a battle, the stories will still be the same and Pvt Perkins will still be alive to die another day.

[Brother Sefiel]

Greetings

It's not very good game in the sense of testing your game-playing skills - it's never been a very good game. And it's certainly not a good competitive game. It's too random, it's dependent on monetary expenditure and the rules are usually badly-written.

If I wanted to play something competitively, something like chess is much, much better.

For me creating a narrative - as weak as that often is - and meeting up with some mates are the only things worthwhile about it in a larger sense. Don't get me wrong, I certainly respect those who raise painting/converting to an artform, but I just don't have that talent...
 

As for dice in RPG's etc, read a system called Amber, diceless system. Its bloody awfull, a bit of randomness is a good thing.

Amber is great if you actually want to role-play.

[Teetengee]

On Immersion: I feel that immersion has never been 40k's strong suit, as things die way too easily, even assuming wounds just mean incapacitated. The fluff is so far divorced from the crunch that it has been more about aesthetics and general feel than anything else for as long as I have played.

 

 

On random: Random can either be lasting or instantaneous. Most of the random in rpgs and wargames is instantaneous: Did this attack hit? Did my spell go off? Did I make my death save? Almost every such game has that type of randomness, and without it the game is very different (amber and chess are far different from d&d and 40k.)

However, some games also use lasting or generative randomness. Non-point buy D&D, call of cthulu, psionic powers in 40k. These are single rolls that will last for an entire game or campaign at times, completely changing the tactics of the player and often dominated how effective they are. Even if balanced on average, these can cause massive upsets in the balance of individual games. This method has two very important effects:

1. It forces players to have and use abilities they may not have wanted to. It vastly restricts what options they have, and the army/character becomes far less personalized, because in order to get something effective, they have to play to strengths they had no input on deciding about. Sometimes, this is more realistic, we don't entirely choose what we are good at, after all. However, since many people play immersive games so that they can imagine themselves with specific skills they don't have, taking the choice of skills away from the player, for whatever reason does harm that immersive/creative fun aspect. (google the types of fun for more of a discussion about why people engage with games to see how this type of generation interacts with sublimation, fantasy, creativity, challenge, narrative, etc...)

2. It creates a sense of helplessness. Helplessness is primarily caused when we feel that what is happening to us is outside of our control. While I consider 40k to be a horror universe, I would not consider that to be the point of the wargame, even sides kind of wreak that experience before it is even off the ground. Having such huge swings caused by single rolls, with little to no choice on your part regarding those results (or even when to make the rolls, if you want to remain competitive) creates helplessness. This is not always undesirable. Sometimes, helplessness is a goal. Call of Cthulu still uses random stat generation, without any choice whatsoever in even which roll goes in which stat. From this point, you assign skill points non randomly to try to make what a character with those aptitudes would do to be useful. But the Cthulu Mythos is all about how humanity is helpless, either incapable of understanding the truth, or insane enough to understand just how awful that truth is. Existential horror requires helplessness, and that means such a generation method is great for that game.

D&D varies a lot, but generally is a system of heroes, rather than people just scrambling to get by. Because of this, random generation has taken a backseat, often only used for games where the characters aren't intended to necessarily be very skilled, games where horror and madness and knowing when to flee are recurrent concepts. Alternatively, games striving for brutal realism will occasionally use this method, but those also typically kill players frequently enough to not make such rolls as permanent as they might be otherwise.

As for 40k, helplessness is generally bad for competitive games. Bad luck isn't an interesting narrative experience when the other person is ruthlessly trying to push for advantage against you, it just kind of sucks. I would argue that lasting random results should really only exist in cooperative or single player games, competitiveness just makes that lead to bitterness.

[Redtoof]

I'm going to disagree to a certain extent with (I think) the majority. To me, creating immersion IS the job of the game designers. Sure, it 100% requires an investment on the part of the player, but the rules are what makes the game work (or not...) and it is their job to make you feel like the game represents a real battle.

 

The biggest issues for immersion to me is when the rules are obtuse, indecipherable or just stupid. As others have mentioned stopping to look stuff up is the bane of immersion. I feel most immersed when my army does what I feel it is supposed to do. It's immersive when my tyranids swarm over the enemy force, falling huge numbers but relentlessly drowning them in bodies until the giant monsters arrive in an attempt to crush what bravery resistance remains. It's not immersive if my little plastic toys all get removed in one shooting phase and I'm down to just using flying hive tyrants and rushing to claim objectives before my 'unstoppable swarm' gets tabled.

 

So far 8th looks like the rules will be more balanced and intuitive, and will allow for a more dynamic game that will encourage my first example, rather than the second.

[Servant of Dante]

Tbh I have not felt any Immersion in the game since 2nd ed. I think its down to what we grew up with. I felt the same way you do now when 3rd ed dropped. In another 18 or so years your kids will complain that Warhammer 40'000 super happy gogogo turbo alpha noblebright hentai gundam whooooooo edition isnt as immersive as age of girlyman.

 

(emphasis mine)

 

. . .

Are you sure that's the word you wanted to use?

. . .

[JeffTibbetts]

What's your podcast called?

 

I don't really like to promote it on here, but if you look up Chapter Approved on iTunes or whatever, you'll find it. Or just add .com and listen online. 

 

My next episode is totally going to be about this topic. The conversation here is quite interesting. My show usually focuses on casual gaming, funhammer, hardcore casual or whatever you want to call it. People like me who really just want the game to be a good time with some buddies. I'm not competitive at all so I think I have a different viewpoint than some. If the mods don't mind, maybe I can post it up when the episode comes out next Wednesday. 

[Teetengee]

I'm going to disagree to a certain extent with (I think) the majority. To me, creating immersion IS the job of the game designers. Sure, it 100% requires an investment on the part of the player, but the rules are what makes the game work (or not...) and it is their job to make you feel like the game represents a real battle.

 

The biggest issues for immersion to me is when the rules are obtuse, indecipherable or just stupid. As others have mentioned stopping to look stuff up is the bane of immersion. I feel most immersed when my army does what I feel it is supposed to do. It's immersive when my tyranids swarm over the enemy force, falling huge numbers but relentlessly drowning them in bodies until the giant monsters arrive in an attempt to crush what bravery resistance remains. It's not immersive if my little plastic toys all get removed in one shooting phase and I'm down to just using flying hive tyrants and rushing to claim objectives before my 'unstoppable swarm' gets tabled.

 

So far 8th looks like the rules will be more balanced and intuitive, and will allow for a more dynamic game that will encourage my first example, rather than the second.

Oh, I definitely agree with you that the game designers are responsible for immersion. Its all about creating a design paradigm where the rules that decide how you do something and what you can do are intuitive based on the context. Additionally, rules have to be constructed in such a way as to promote the "right" types of interaction with the game so as to promote the feelings that are congruent with the story of whatever game is going on.

 

Whether or not immersion is important is up to the player however.

 

For a video game example, if you are using motion capture of some kind, you wouldn't want a slashing motion to trigger a stab action. Imagine if Twilight Princess had had you stab punch forward in order to slash down and slash down in order to descend a ladder (or similar such commands). Mechanically, it is entirely possible, but the disconnect would be immersion breaking.

 

It's a little harder with a board game, since the abstractions come between direct physical action and rules actions, but ultimately the same principle applies. Rules have to be constructed in such a way that they inspire the proper feelings relevant to the actions they determine the outcome of, or immersion suffers.

[JeffTibbetts]

 

I'm going to disagree to a certain extent with (I think) the majority. To me, creating immersion IS the job of the game designers. Sure, it 100% requires an investment on the part of the player, but the rules are what makes the game work (or not...) and it is their job to make you feel like the game represents a real battle.

 

The biggest issues for immersion to me is when the rules are obtuse, indecipherable or just stupid. As others have mentioned stopping to look stuff up is the bane of immersion. I feel most immersed when my army does what I feel it is supposed to do. It's immersive when my tyranids swarm over the enemy force, falling huge numbers but relentlessly drowning them in bodies until the giant monsters arrive in an attempt to crush what bravery resistance remains. It's not immersive if my little plastic toys all get removed in one shooting phase and I'm down to just using flying hive tyrants and rushing to claim objectives before my 'unstoppable swarm' gets tabled.

 

So far 8th looks like the rules will be more balanced and intuitive, and will allow for a more dynamic game that will encourage my first example, rather than the second.

Oh, I definitely agree with you that the game designers are responsible for immersion. Its all about creating a design paradigm where the rules that decide how you do something and what you can do are intuitive based on the context. Additionally, rules have to be constructed in such a way as to promote the "right" types of interaction with the game so as to promote the feelings that are congruent with the story of whatever game is going on.

 

Whether or not immersion is important is up to the player however.

 

For a video game example, if you are using motion capture of some kind, you wouldn't want a slashing motion to trigger a stab action. Imagine if Twilight Princess had had you stab punch forward in order to slash down and slash down in order to descend a ladder (or similar such commands). Mechanically, it is entirely possible, but the disconnect would be immersion breaking.

 

It's a little harder with a board game, since the abstractions come between direct physical action and rules actions, but ultimately the same principle applies. Rules have to be constructed in such a way that they inspire the proper feelings relevant to the actions they determine the outcome of, or immersion suffers.

 

 

This makes a LOT of sense. If the rules seem 'off' at all it kind of takes me right out. Perfect example was my buddy hiding a Necron Ghost Ark around a corner, and then just peeking the tip out because, on open-topped vehicles, you measure guns from the hull. I tried to argue a little, but really it just rubbed me the wrong way. I'm certain the designers never intended people to do those things though. 

 

Another, maybe less extreme example is the disconnect many of us have felt over the use of units like assault marines, who just never seemed capable of doing the things we really thought they should be based on all the fluff and fiction we've read. 

 

If the rules 'get out of the way' and let the story flow, I'm a happy gamer. 

[Olis]

If the mods don't mind, maybe I can post it up when the episode comes out next Wednesday. 

 

If you put the link in your sig, you won't need to worry about us Mods squinting at the link with suspicion. Or... you could always ping a PM to one of us to seek approval for just posting the link. :)

[Slave to Darkness]

 

Tbh I have not felt any Immersion in the game since 2nd ed. I think its down to what we grew up with. I felt the same way you do now when 3rd ed dropped. In another 18 or so years your kids will complain that Warhammer 40'000 super happy gogogo turbo alpha noblebright hentai gundam whooooooo edition isnt as immersive as age of girlyman.

 

(emphasis mine)

 

. . .

Are you sure that's the word you wanted to use?

. . .

Yep, how else will they keep Slaaneshi players interested. :lol:

[JeffTibbetts]

If the mods don't mind, maybe I can post it up when the episode comes out next Wednesday.

If you put the link in your sig, you won't need to worry about us Mods squinting at the link with suspicion. Or... you could always ping a PM to one of us to seek approval for just posting the link.

Sounds good! Link is in the sig now. :D It's the CA logo if anyone wants to check it out.