The term ‘Immersion’ first entered the larp scene with the Turku Manfesto back in 1999. Other people (myself included) who didn’t know about the manifesto or what was happening in Nordic-land were developing other ideas along the same lines around that tim, if perhaps not has strongly codified or set out.

Immersion was not properly included in the GNS theory developed around the same time by the Forge in the US, through ‘simulationism’ was perhaps ill-defined enough to include it. This might be reflection of the fact that US theorists were (and are) tabletop roleplayers, and not looking at the larp scene, or that perhaps this is a more definite larp concept rather than tabletop concept.

The term Immersion got banded around a lot over the last decade on the ‘nordic art larp’ scene. Even some of the new movements still define themselves in opposition to it. In this article I’m going to looking at some of the different issues I see of the word/concept.

If I say a larp is or is not ‘immersive,’ I might be referring to some or all of the following:

• Environmental Immersion. Sometimes called the ‘360 degree illusion.’ Making the physical setting/experience as real as possible. For example, metal swords are more immersive than foam ones. Note this might be achieved by writing a setting to fit what can be phy reppd – for example in the Totem larp, latex was a deadly substance to the characters, so latex covered swords were exactly what they were.
• Physical Immersion. If you character is starving to death, it’s more immersive if you are at least slightly hungry rather than well fed. If a monster jumps out at you and you experience the ‘fight or flight’ reaction in your body, that is immersive.
• Character Immersion. Feeling the emotions of your character, and thinking their thoughts in the first person. When you see your in-character lover, feeling your attraction towards them instinctively.
• Cultural Immersion. Being immersed not in the personal elements of your character, but in their cultural heritage. A Narn feels hatred towards a Centauri and reverence for the book of Q’uan, because his culture has taught him since birth to feel these things. This is a slightly artificial distinction between character/culture (like the nature/nuture debate), but I feel sometimes a useful one.
• Experience Immersion. If I am playing a character with a heavy cold or the pain of bereavement, I reference my own experience and try to recreate that feeling – I immerse in it. I’m not immersing in the character as such, but in the situation / experience they are going through. My focus is not on the character itself, but on the power of what they are experiencing.

Simulation is close to Immersionism, but separate. A simulationist has is character acts as the player think his character would. An immersionist becomes the character, and by doing so acts as his character would.

There is a separate question of whether or not ‘immersion’ is a good thing.

Most people I feel would regard at least a low level of immersion as a good thing – having high quality props that resemble what they should, and people not acting completely inconsistency to their character (and indeed, staying in character). Even the Jeepform tradition that openly rejects classic immersion would still welcome ‘experience immersion’ in the emotions of the situation.

Some aspects of immersion do take effort or involve experiences which on the face of it might not be ‘pleasant’ – immersing in grief over bereavement for example, or immersing in the sense of horror if their character is mistreated. This comes back to why the player wishes to roleplay at all. Some players (who may identify as ‘immersionists’) play in order to have powerful experiences (the same principle that leads some people to ride on a rollercoaster or watch a horror movie). For this play style, immersion (in one form or another) might actually be an end in and of itself.

‘Realism’ is not quite the same as immersion. Certain extreme kinds of ‘realism’ can actually be less immersive. For example, some people find it more difficult to stay in character if in physical discomfort or if they are concerned about a real health & safety risk. This point can be addressed by carefully advertising the level of ‘hardcoreness’ of the event, so players can be properly prepared for it and make an informed choice about being involved. Also, the event should be designed to try to avoid these cases where immersion is weakened from happening. If people will need to break character when boffer combat starts near a campfire on safety grounds, then it’s wise to design the plot to reduce the chances of such a fight occurring.

What level and type of immersion you are seeking to cater for should be a basic premise when designing a larp, and one communicated to the players. This decision should then inform other decision points in the creative process. IF you seek high immersion generally, you are going to want to keep your rule system simple, since counting hit points weakens immersion. If you want high experience immersion, then you are going to want to design plots that result in strong emotional experiences.

In summary then, my advice when designing a larp experience:

• Consider if Immersion is one of your designs goals or not. If so, decide how important it is. For example if you seek a high level of immersion you probably want a minimalist rule system, which in turn may affect your other creative decisions.
• Consider what sort of immersion you are aiming for. It is an overloaded term, and means little unless you give it meaning.
• Tell the players if immersion is a goal, openly, and how ‘hardcore’ you expect the experience to be. This will put off some players, but also attract others. Depending on your decisions, make a risk assessment (everything has risk, but risk can be managed).