Diegetic Fun versus Non-Diegetic Fun
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 07. 2024
- In Episode 108 the guys have been thinking about diegetic things, diegetics, diegesis. Its a real word, honestly, and here they discuss it in relation to tabletop miniatures games.
Check out Man O' Kent Games here: www.manokentgames.com
Check out Planet Smasher Games here: planetsmasher.games
The Rule of Carnage discord server: / discord
If you want to support the channel financially you can join Mike's Patreon here: / planetsmashergames
If you want the number on Glenn's Patreon to go up one, you can join his Patreon here: / manokentgames
Mike you nailed it, about "why miniatures?".
Pacific Command was a great example. By not having minis you sacrifice some diegetic fun in order to amplify the non-diegetic fun, but you definitely do lose some diegetic fun not having minis and for some people they won't like it, but that's okay.
This was a great chat. Good way to think about design.
Yeah, Pacific Command is a great idea to implement the double blind game mechanic.
Miniatures would totally get in the way of things.
Also, using poker chips is rather appropriate since poker is also a game of imperfect information, Pacific Command almost doubly so.
We all need more miniatures in our lives.
100% accurate.
Love the podcast guys.
Another idea: What are the 'legacy' rules of 40k and AoS that a modern wargame in the same style (Same size of armies, same army construction) would change? What rules advances have been made that GW don't adopt because it would mess up the history of Warhammer?
I konw you've done an episode where you talk about 'sixes always hit' and other issues like that (it was great!), but I mean more about unit coherency, Strength and toughness, number of dice rolled etc.
Anyway just an idea. Best guys! Hello from a fellow Brit!
Well, I've taken a bit of a look at GW in an upcoming vid. In short, I don't think GW avoid new mechanics to avoid messing up the history of the game, I think they avoid them because they're interested in games that are easy to pilot for their audience over ones that are good.
I like diegetic and non-diegetic fun. And I also like that these interesting conversations are not interrupted by commercials 🙂
Yeah, might turn on monetization on these if we get to 10,000 subscribers or something, until then it feels like we're just annoying a whole lot of folk for the price of a third of a cup of coffee.
@@RuleofCarnage and what else can you get for that price these days 😂
I chuckled at "chess with list building"
"I don't need any more Miniatures in my life"?
UNSUBSCRIBED!
Seriously though, diegetic is a far more useful word than immersion. When I talk about role-playing games online, people throw the word immersion around as a goal, but refused to define what that goal is. If you read between the lines, what they're looking for is diegetic fun. Thank you for this conversation, it has helped me find a better set of terminology to discuss these things.
I think immersion is one of those terms that is both not of a lot of use and one where those using it aren't always entirely certain what they mean. I think its often intended to do with narrative, but its possible to be entirely immersed in a totally abstract game. Better sets of terminology are very much what we're here for.
First