Re the first: This is a semantic dance. Immersion is not rigidly defined. I define it as the sense of losing oneself in the diegetic space, usually by identifying with a particular element within it. I took it as self-evident that no one is achieving total immersion, but yes, you are correct there, no one is achieving full immersion. But the GM cannot have even high immersion. They are an individual. The NPCs are many. The GM is the embodiment of the laws of physics, nature, cause and effect, etc. That is not a human, or even sapient, identity with which they could identify.
Re the second: That’s a simplified workflow that applies to basically any GM-based system. Nothing that could be reasonably added would change the fact that the chain is shorter with fewer steps. That’s how real number subtraction works.
n-x<n where x>0
Re the rest of it: I’m sorry. I assumed you would understand that my saying ‘don’t discount this possibility’ is not the same as ‘absolutely everyone must do this my perfect and correct way.’ I assumed you would take it as patently obvious all methods one might approach any game with must involve participant consent, but, okay, let’s start with the full text of Principia Mathematica so we can establish 1+1=2 and then move on to establish a shared moral framework of consent and all the other things that I would consider obvious but you feel the need to spell out explicitly, and then finally we can have a nice, clearly defined discussion about dice.
Re the first: This is a semantic dance. Immersion is not rigidly defined. I define it as the sense of losing oneself in the diegetic space, usually by identifying with a particular element within it. I took it as self-evident that no one is achieving total immersion, but yes, you are correct there, no one is achieving full immersion. But the GM cannot have even high immersion. They are an individual. The NPCs are many. The GM is the embodiment of the laws of physics, nature, cause and effect, etc. That is not a human, or even sapient, identity with which they could identify.
Re the second: That’s a simplified workflow that applies to basically any GM-based system. Nothing that could be reasonably added would change the fact that the chain is shorter with fewer steps. That’s how real number subtraction works.
n-x<n where x>0Re the rest of it: I’m sorry. I assumed you would understand that my saying ‘don’t discount this possibility’ is not the same as ‘absolutely everyone must do this my perfect and correct way.’ I assumed you would take it as patently obvious all methods one might approach any game with must involve participant consent, but, okay, let’s start with the full text of Principia Mathematica so we can establish 1+1=2 and then move on to establish a shared moral framework of consent and all the other things that I would consider obvious but you feel the need to spell out explicitly, and then finally we can have a nice, clearly defined discussion about dice.