all of this article do not even fit the bill of immersion... the problem doesn'T come from the DM at all... i did everything you described in this articles for the last 20 years and none of it ever worked, not even the magical item... reason being, most players are there for their characters, it doens't matter which world they are in as long as they play that character. as such, to them the world takes a back seat, even if you try to tie their background to that world of yours, they won't care, for its not them having linked it to their character. they will think of it as "the DM wants to enforce his story onto mine." thats the real problem here... of all the players who do want immersion, only about 5% really want immersion, the other 95% really only want to be in character at all times and thats immersion enough for them.

exemple: i give a character the axe of the dwarven lord, it has runes inscribed in dwarvish about its predessessors... never has that player ever wantedto know the lore of that axe, to him it wasjust that, another weapon to be wielded... i even usedthe axe sentienceto try and make him understand the fact the weapon is alive... all he wanted was to bash in. he liked the interaction, but aslong asit was his interaction he was fine with it. everything else from the world wasn't important. another campaign had the same result as the axe passed down not one, but 3 players and none of them wanted to know anything about dwarves of old. both eventually lost the axe to the fact the axe didn'T want to work with them after a while of being ignored. and both campaign,the players complained that they shouldn't lose treasure.

the point is...
immersion has nothing to do about world building... in the words of matt colville :"you play d&d to bash things in, DM builds worlds for themselves because they want to !" he's right, the world has no bearing when it comes to player characters... just think of it as yourself in this very reality... do you know everything about world war II ? do you know anything about all of the gods that exists ? do you know everything about the next country ? do you even want to learn about any of those things or is your fortune more important ? the only reason we know as much as we do, is because in school we were forced to learn them. your very article is prooving this even more, all you wanted was for you to use "YOUR CHARACTER" that was immersion enough for you.

so DMs... stop trying to make worlds for others, your playerswont care,maybe you'll find 1 or two who will eventually be curious about it...
no if you want to design a world, do it for yourself ! thats the pooint of a world,to not be forced to hand wave everything by the seat of your pants. a world is not for your players to explore, it is for you to know whats hapenning in the world around the players. that way when they decide not to go to that tavern of yours, you wont be needing to develop out of nowhere tons of patrons in the street, you'll know them already. 

so yeah DMs...
don't put your world in front of yours players like they should engage in it, they won't... they will engage it only if it truly has a reason within their character backstory.
instead, put the world around them ! may they notice it or not, is not your call... its theirs ! but to you, you will find it much much much easier to DM for them when they throw you a curve ball, because you will know whats around the corner already ! thats the goal of a world... its not for players, its for DMs.

Quote from DnDPaladin >>

so yeah DMs...
don't put your world in front of yours players like they should engage in it, they won't... they will engage it only if it truly has a reason within their character backstory.
instead, put the world around them ! may they notice it or not, is not your call... its theirs ! but to you, you will find it much much much easier to DM for them when they throw you a curve ball, because you will know whats around the corner already ! thats the goal of a world... its not for players, its for DMs.

I've definitely found this to the case. I find worldbuilding enjoyable, but also because I'll know a world I make better than anything I got off a book. One of the greatest compliments my players have given me is that the world feels alive to them, because I understand every little bit of it and can make the world work like an actual living, breathing world. Yes, the players have a big effect on the world, but the world moves on its own sometimes. That's the most immersive thing you can do. 

Decent article, but didn’t tell me much about actually making a game immersive, I read nothing of using voices, acting out your character, describing combat vividly, using visual aids, or anything that makes a game immersive, it just talked while making a occasional joke or pitching some printed adventure or referencing a WOTC product.

Its alright and but like everyone else says. Sorry I just came to check out the article.

My group just has fun hanging out bashing monsters. I try to have a story, but it’s always hit or miss and generally players don’t care as long as their PCs get to do cool stuff.

It’s enough work for me to get an adventure prepped every week and get it rolling, I simply don’t have time to make a living, breathing world. Actually I’m not even sure what that really means . 95 percent of the game is player facing, and if I’m not going to use it in the next 2-3 sessions it’s irrelevant .

That being said (not to dump on article) sounds awesome and a game I’d love to be a part of 👍 I just don’t want to run it 😆!

This article was OK I guess, but there were too many plugs for books. This honestly could've been amazing, but those mentioned books, ironically, totally ruin the immersion. Though this article really gives some good advice (never tell, just show at its most basic), it feels too much like an ad to like. Just to make this clear: I'm not telling you to ignore the advice, which is actually really good for DMs, just, if the writer ever reads this, please try and keep the references to products you're selling at a minimum...

I really enjoyed this article and found many good tips that I will be using in my campaign. I thought that it would cover more in terms of immersion during gameplay from the title but am happy with the article either way. Thanks!

Thanks for sharing this article! As a writer of traditional prose narrative in addition to my homebrew D&D campaign, I often hear/read the advice to "show, not tell" when it comes to your worldbuilding and your characters' traits. I think this article had some really great suggestions on how to apply that advice to a D&D campaign in a way that weaves tidbits of lore in naturally (and concisely, in some cases — it's not that many extra words to note that a grand room has "paintings showing the [group]'s victory at [placename]" on the walls or that the Animated Armor your characters just encountered "resembles the style of [country], but looks much, much older") and invites your players to interact with and form a connection with the world and its history. Not every player/character will choose to accept that invitation, and you do have to be prepared for that and ready to change tactics (or just let it drop, depending on how essential a particular piece of lore or such is to the campaign). Obviously knowing your group and your players is important for picking the right methods and locations to drop in lore (and for finding ways to build a connection between the lore and what they as characters care about).

Quote from DnDPaladin >>

so DMs... stop trying to make worlds for others, your playerswont care,maybe you'll find 1 or two who will eventually be curious about it...
no if you want to design a world, do it for yourself ! thats the pooint of a world,to not be forced to hand wave everything by the seat of your pants. a world is not for your players to explore, it is for you to know whats hapenning in the world around the players. that way when they decide not to go to that tavern of yours, you wont be needing to develop out of nowhere tons of patrons in the street, you'll know them already. 

so yeah DMs...
don't put your world in front of yours players like they should engage in it, they won't... they will engage it only if it truly has a reason within their character backstory.
instead, put the world around them ! may they notice it or not, is not your call... its theirs ! but to you, you will find it much much much easier to DM for them when they throw you a curve ball, because you will know whats around the corner already ! thats the goal of a world... its not for players, its for DMs.

 Though I really can understand some of this, I would point out that it's pretty easy to run the worldbuilding and immersion around the characters. For instance: characters' actions should have reactions. Maybe that axe of the dwarven lords just wants someone to talk to and gets sulky and underpowered when the wielder never talks to them. Maybe they have to learn a bit of lore to get some goal that they really do want.

Also, it's good to remember that D&D is a work of cooperation between the players and the DM. Though the players are the stars of the show, the setting does matter. The players can do nothing if there isn't a world to do it in. Even minor details that really don't affect the player's ability to smash things can immerse them, and I have successfully been able to immerse my players before. It's all a matter of balancing how much lore you include, making sure the lore aligns with rather than opposes the character's goals.

For example, to hint at my players of some lore about the city, I only revealed it when they searched for clues (this was a mystery arc of the campaign). Whenever they looked for clues, they'd find whatever they wanted (if they succeeded) and a bit of lore (such as carvings on the wall or strange plant life) regardless of whether they succeeded or not. This built the world around them enough to immerse them, but didn't get in the way of their spotlight.

How ironic, it's an article about how to not let your world become so boring that your players tone it out.... and I toned it out after the first section. 

The typos 😬

A couple of ideas I tried in my sessions:

1) reward players with stories. When you reward players with loot, usually it tends to be translated into gold and becomes a number, readily forgotten. Since none of my friends really cares about numbers, it feels completely useless to search for treasures. Instead, a thing I like to do is rewarding players with lore itself. The sapphire they find comes with a pirate hat, a flag and soon they'll discover this is not simply a gem, it was once the eye of a ruthless pirate.

Treasure becomes an occasion to tell part of a story. Maybe a completely different story. Sometimes I even let players tell the story of the pirate, so they feel even more rewarded by becoming DM for a minute. Do they tell an awesome tale? Boom: inspiration, mate!

Statues always tell stories, so they're perfect things to play with lore. Carvings, paintings. Everything can give out part of your world.

2) make players work for lore.

If you just drop lore on them, players will feel like they "have to" listen to you like a teacher. If instead you hold back your lore as a prize, they will listen because they finally "got to".

In curse of strahd I scrambled the story of Khazan into small recordings, and scattered them across the map. Sometimes they would find a sentence or two, and this made the lore drop extremely interesting for them because it challenged them to understand what really happened and when each sentence was recorded. It also helps building up some excitement when you finally understand that the thing you always assumed was the end of the story actually happened decades before the beginning, and things finally get to their place.

3) let players leave a mark on the story.

As a DM, I know how fun it can be to tell a story. This is why I often include moments to allow the players to do the same in a harmless way. Designate some blank space that they can fill in so that you can weave your story together. Simple things like asking players why a place their character should know was abandoned (if it's not important to the story you had in mind) can make them very happy. Especially bards.

4) tourist guides are a thing.

And followers too. Ever thought about a bard knowing about the old battle and recalling that piece of lore only when the skeletons attack? Imagine the old bard terrified, screaming and fighting and trying to help you by telling you what used to be their tactics...

Or you could have the same bard walk you through a city, and randomly point at a column and tell you that there they once stabbed a general. 

One or my players liked the thing so much his character even started taking pictures xD.

So yeah, in the end think about sharing lore when it's appropriate and in a short and well scattered flow. I figured DM should never talk for more than a minute when delivering information (unless everyone stares silently at you, in that case keep going, they're hooked!).

Quote from monkmulticlasser >>

Decent article, but didn’t tell me much about actually making a game immersive, I read nothing of using voices, acting out your character, describing combat vividly, using visual aids, or anything that makes a game immersive, it just talked while making a occasional joke or pitching some printed adventure or referencing a WOTC product.

 I agree with all these points. The article's fine, but I would have liked some actual tips on how to make my game more immersive.

D&D is a collaborative game.  While the source books and modules are full of rules and descriptions, I haven't seen any WoTC material that tells the players HOW to play the game.  Someone once compared learning to play D&D by reading the source books to learning to play MTG by just reading the information on the cards.

If the DM is going to try to create engaging (I assume that's what is meant by "immersive" here) environments by just building a world and describing it to players who have built their own worlds around their own characters, there's bound to be some frustrations when those multiple worlds collide in awkward, unsatisfying ways.

To build engaging worlds, the DM and players would probably find some benefit in engaging with each other before game play.  There need to be some expectations concerning how the players will play the game and how the DM expects them to play the game.  Is this a world where stealth and resonance is rewarded?  Where the political thrive? Where might makes right?  Where every room has a trap, puzzle, or essential clue?  Where the discovery of an item is a thread to a complex world of adventure?  What do the players and DM need to get out of the game for it to be a rewarding experience?  D&D is somewhat distinct from collaborative storytelling as the game uses dice to resolve conflict, but some collaboration helps to support engagement.

Without this type of player engagement, the default "enter room, kill monsters, repeat" can become a rewarding or disheartening default D&D experience depending on the needs of those at the table.  If the DM and players, however, are looking for something more, they should probably do some pre-game world-building engagement until the group is good enough to do this type of world building intuitively.  If the DM and players want the table to be rewarding, they may also want to voice their concerns when they find the game is not as engaging as they would like.  Honesty at the table is probably the easiest way to build engagement.

The way I do it is I try to work it into a normal conversation. I have an NPC make a reference to an item, place, or person the players don't know. When you have them being the ones asking "what's that?" instead of just telling them, it makes it feel more like they're figuring things out, not like you're shoving lore at them.

I've got the literal opposite of the 1st two posters.  I find this article pretty great.  Dangle the carrots in their face.  Over-preparing is a waste, but a total lack of preparation often leads to a bland boring world for nearly every player but the power gamer who just want to kill things.  And even then...

Immersion is a blend of interesting PC's, character hooks, an environment that is interesting, and a DM understanding their players.  The number one question to start of a campaign is to ask the players what do you want?  What do you expect?  What kind of character (not class/race) do you envision?  From there the stage is set.

Most players want a rich and vibrant world.  But it is THEIR story. They need to be able to interact with it, change and shape it, and be important (at least in their little pocket).  No player wants a white void with NPC3 AC 14 55HP +5 attach 2d8 fire dmg.... They eat up a short but exciting description.  "Torgaz the fire-scourge is a hideous as the Prophet said.  Its skin is blacked and scaly, with hollow sockets where the eyes once were.  Jets of flame seem to burst forth as if trying to escape.  You cover your nose and recoil for the moment as the horrid spell of burnt meat assaults' you."   Drak the Cleric "I pull for the Auril's Tear and hold it aloft... Not Today Demon!  Hell freezes over now!"  as the player grins at a the fruit of their hard work paying off.  Those smiles, those moments of fear.  The emotional attachment... it takes all of it.

I think people hear "Worldbuilding" and think it means: Building a whole campaign world.  It doesn't.  It never has.  If all your worldbuilding is setting up the adventure some hooks for it, and some breadcrumbs of a future world, that's all you need.  A diary of a long lost mage as a seed for a future plot you 'might' want them to pursue (if they bite), ancient elven corpses littering a battlefield hinting at empire of old (and the trapped elven souls in that dungeon you've been dying to run), or a rare pressed flower in an abandon herbalists shop, which just so happens to be part of a rare cure for the magical disease affecting a PC's loved one from their backstory (Now where to get more, who collected these!?)   The same goes for a handful of colorful NPC's.  Watch/Listen to Critical Role.  The players eat the NPC's up.  Some people can do that on the fly, others need time to prep (Like Matt Mercer).  Find your niche... your zen of preparation and (prepared) improvisation.

Know that every group will be different.  As mentioned, get to know the players.  Heck the players should get to know the players.  Most players want the lovely playground, as long as its their play.  Make it work the while.  Toss the clues, toss the seeds, see what they bite at.  But have a rich engaging story ready.  Very few players want a bland experience.  They are the exception and not the rule as some posters seem to think.  This usually comes from a small group of games or the same players... and we've all had them.  But most want the Technicolor, Dolby Surround Sound, full Avengers plotline... even if you start out as a farmer hero going to rescue the neighbors dog.  We all have to start somewhere... (now why did that Necromancer want to steal all the pets from the farming town...?)

...Does this mean that Mordenkainen has a canonical Ian McKellan voice?

This is by far the best article I have read on this site. What an idea! I am definitely going to reframe how I approach world building. It makes so much sense to focus on the encounters, and then use the npcs and items to share the lore. Builds investment because they see it for themselves. Living it is the best way to remember it. Thanks!

I never want the books to tell me how to play. I play with a group that switches DMs and we each have different ways to play. I had a character that wanted to be a cook so I had the real person whip up stuff with food items provided( made a pretty good banana split). Lady DMing had me actually hold me breath when my character was under water. One guy was in a smithing competition so I had him shape playdough into different items. Point in the books never told us to do stuff like that.

One DM, she has a wonderful world and will ask us out of game what our characters motivations and goals are and will shape them into the story as we go along. 

Anyway, there's lots of ways to be immersive and I liked some of the ideas in the article. Also let's keep it positive responders, dont you all read enough negativity everywhere else? 

Personally,  I find it fascinating how many sites, including this one, are full of advice for game masters on how to do things right (in principle or where specific subjects/themes are concerned), yet they often lack advice on how to be a good player and most of all how to engage with the content and to communicate your interests well.

I am not dismissing the advice, for much of it is quite useful, and a good game master never stops learning, but I do think the problem often lies elsewhere.

Let us face it, the game master already has much more on their plate than any other person at the table, and then some. And while the game master should always understand and respect the Peter Parker principle (with great power comes great responsibility) all too often the problem is a player or players and their inability to care, understand, engage, communicate, negotiate with all the content that the game master prepared based on the promise of the campaign and their understanding of group's interests.

Every single role playing table has different social dynamics, preferences, interests, terminology interpretations and so on. On top of that the game master is often the one managing communication, scheduling and compromises among the group members, trying to make it all work. And all too often players just show up to the table expecting to be entertained, forgetting that the game master is not there to entertain them, and that the whole group is there to entertain itself. And most of all that the game master has every right to enjoy the session as much as players do (yeah I know a very radical position).

World building for yourself (as noted by other comments here) is a valid point. The concept of Aragorn's tax plan applies here. That is the observation that players are likely not interested in Aragorn's tax plan but such tax plan must exist in order for Gondor to actually function. In this case the game master is the one that knows the plan and often considers its implications for themselves and uses these implications to simulate the world the characters are in. The characters benefit from that and the process supports immersion. However all to often the players disregard the need for existence of such things because it gets in a way of their own fun (whatever it may be). At that point the game master might need to ask themselves some question: Is this the right group and game for me? Am I getting out of it what I want? Because contrary to popular belief they too have rights at the table...

In the end there are only two types of games, the ones you enjoy and the ones you do not. So there is no such thing as good or bad game, but there is such thing as a game that is not for you and the game that is for you. Anyone else trying to convince you otherwise is simply trying to sell you something.