Free e-book on psychological experience of LARP

Community Larp discussion
#28

[quote=“Stephanie”]There was someone who spent their Saturday at Chimera feeling pretty damn low, after attending your Stanford Prison game. (I don’t know who it was, sorry, I heard this second hand from my sister, and she didn’t remember their name.) Are you sure you’re managing trauma as well as you think you are?
[/quote]

People feel down after games for all sorts of reasons. You also write games where people feel down afterwards. I suppose the important factor would be whether they regretted playing it, and to what extent.

Bad Dreams was my favourite game at Chimera. It was a very worth while experience. I felt down for a while afterwards too, and I wouldn’t change it for anything.

#29

[quote=“Viperion”][quote=“Adrexia”]But it’s not the same reason you would play other sorts of Larp. It’s also not fair in any way to insult the people who play these larps. We could just as easily insult you for not understanding them.[/quote] :blush: I didn’t mean to come off insulting… my earlier comment was not directed at the participants in the “Bad Dreams” style larps, but the “GR” type (see first page of this thread) which thankfully don’t get run over here (that I know of).

My apologies if I have offended anyone.[/quote]

I figured that was the case. Personally I wouldn’t play GR either. I feel there is a place for that sort of “game”, but it’s nowhere near me. If it helps others in some way though, I wouldn’t judge them for it. Experiences are relative. Drunk, on the other hand, I would play.

#30

Sure I do. And I pay a lot of attention before the game on how to build up trust between the participants and letting people know they have an easy out if they need it, and monitoring the game while it’s happening and checking on people who look like they’re maybe not coping, and after the game giving people a debrief phase to walk out of that headspace. And I try to engineer things so that people have a reasonable chance to get some kind of positive resolution by the end of it, because I’m not actually about the misery. Regret they played? I hope not, but I guess that’s always a risk. But at least I’m thinking about it, y’know?

The story I heard about Bad Dreams is that the game ended and you were all sent straight to bed without any kind of ‘talking it out’ phase. Maybe that got garbled in transmission, and actually there was really great game management with lots of best practice stuff going on, and that one person was just really unlucky. But it’s still worth thinking about.

#31

To be fair, Vanya gave people multiple options to back out if they were uncertain after explicitly expressing the ‘dark’ nature of the game and the necessary level of maturity required for it. I think being responsible for this sort of thing is a two-way system, and if a player has any lack of trust or doubt of their own abilities or that of the GM to play through the game in a sensible way, why are they playing? Likewise, if the GM has the same concerns, why are they letting that person play?

Steph, it sounds to me like you’re implying Vanya (or the others who were helping him run the game) didn’t think about how players may react to his game, but I don’t think you mean that. I don’t think that’s a fair assertion from second hand knowledge, especially when there’s been no claim that the game itself was the cause for this person to feel negative in a way beyond what would be desired (by that, I’m referring to the fact that many players chose Bad Dreams: Trust specifically for an emotionally engaging and challenging experience). Even assuming that said person was feeling down because of the game, we can’t just assume it was due to some mistake on the GM’s behalf. Obviously, if that were the case things would be a bit different. This is a supportive community though, so I would like to believe that such issues could be sorted out constructively for all parties involved.

I can’t help but feel we’re drifting from the topic a little though.

#32

Actually, “bleed” is precisely the topic of the thesis Zanni linked to.

Bleed is when a game affects your real life, or your real life affects a game. Especially emotionally.

#33

I know that the GMs for that game were really upfront about letting people know that it was going to be a challenging heavy game. Which is a good thing. But I also heard that someone’s hand got cut on a plastic knife that broke during the game (why not a larp safe knife?), and heard a rumour that someone had a bad emotional outcome. So it’s worth asking about, especially when one of the GMs is saying that larps are more controlled than famous psych experiments that affected people in negative ways for the rest of their lives, and where the researchers themselves got pulled into the fiction.

Also, for the record, I’ve heard a lot of people saying great things about the game. Just, some of the comments have made me wonder a bit.

[quote]especially when there’s been no claim that the game itself was the cause for this person to feel negative in a way beyond what would be desired[/quote]Can I get a clarification on what you mean? Whether the game itself caused someone to feel bad vs some other event? Or that the game was expected to cause someone to feel bad but was more so than expected?

[quote]I think being responsible for this sort of thing is a two-way system, and if a player has any lack of trust or doubt of their own abilities or that of the GM to play through the game in a sensible way, why are they playing? Likewise, if the GM has the same concerns, why are they letting that person play?[/quote]Look, if you haven’t already, I recommend you take a look at the “Safety in Larp” talk that Idiot posted a link to a while back. There’s a lot of stuff in there about theory and practice and what works and what doesn’t for games that are designing for emotional bleed - including games that put in safety features like cut/break rules or OOC areas and what has to happen at game management level for people to actually use them when they need to.

#34

Okay, firstly, I haven’t been replying because I have found you incredibly insulting Steph and was waiting to calm down first. So lets go through this point by point.

Between the game description and the emails I sent out, I have actively encouraged people who were not confident in themselves to step out. I was explicit with what to expect from this game.

At the Pre-Game briefing we reiterated all of the warning, gave people the outs for within the game.

Within the game, as explained in the Pre-game, we had Porl as a psychiatrist IC but he was alos there for people who felt uncomfortable and wanted to privately discuss their issues.

The plastic knife incident, was an unexpected problem. It was a Gm that got scratched, it was supposed to be a one off prop.

The Gm’s were wandering the area the entire time, we were pushing people but also working to make sure they were not going too far.

The point of the game was to illustrate how humans can and do react in that sort of situation. Which is negative. It should disturb people because it is a disturbing part of humanity.

Saying that, at the end of the game we held a comprehensive debrief. Where we explaing the experiments, the point of everything we did, why it is problematic.

I had a player break into tears and he loved the game for it.

#35

He also had a blurb which was utterly uninformative, and which did not create any possibility of informed consent. While I understand that he did inform people of the nature of the game later, it’s not exactly best practice either - both from a safety POV, and from an “attracting players who are a good match for the game” POV.

Once you’ve signed up, there are social barriers to backing out. Those barriers are higher once you actually get to the venue. Which is why it is absolutely vital to give people enough information up front to decide whether they really want to go there.

People can be mistaken about their own limits. They can have misunderstood the information provided about what will happen in the game. They might have understood that information, but things may have gone beyond what they implicitly consented to. They can have been actively deceived in order to avoid spoilers. These are real problems with edgy games, and they need to be addressed seriously by GMs, not just shrugged off and dumped in the players lap.

(This isn’t just a problem with “edgy” games BTW; I’ve seen character sheets in ordinary games which have contained disturbing, triggering material, with no up-front warning (and worse, it was utterly gratuitious and had no relevance to the story). Please, GMs, think about this stuff. Its not fair on your players to dump this stuff in their lap without asking them first if they want to play that sort of thing).

#36

Hi Vanya, thanks for the clarification. It’s good to know that what I heard about game conduct was garbled in transmission.

Take care,

Stephanie

#37

Ditto. There’s no question that edgy games are fun for some people, and I’m really pleased that people are trying to run them.

#38

This is the email I sent to players initially Idiot. Everyone replied to it saying they wanted in.

[quote]Hey,

This is the confirmation email for Bad Dreams: Trust. You were
allocated one of limited spaces at the game, and we ask that you read
this serious email carefully and give it due consideration. I want to
make sure that everyone in this game is fully aware and acknowledges
the nature and danger of this game. It is based on previous
psychological experiments, as such, there is a real possibility for
this game to get intense. This is a hands on game, that is not
something that you can opt out of. Saying that, I expect all players
to be mature and to never hurt anyone else. We will be pushing buttons
quite specifically, we will be picking on you physically and
emotionally.

This game has been double booked, so if you are having second thoughts
please tell me immediately. This is the safest point to opt out, your
well being is of utmost importance to us and someone else can still
take the place.

Please email me back ASAP confirming that you would like to play.

Thank you,
Vanya[/quote]

The safety of my players is ALWAYS my primary concern but safety is a very subjective term. I have played in a game which had me crying uncontrollably for over an hour and still has an emotional impact upon me. That is the highlight of the game because it was catharsis and it also showed me things about myself that I have never before considered. I am a hard man to make feel helpless so being put into a helpless position was hard but it let me emphasise with people in that state. It was amazing and I consider it to be incredibly positive. So taking care of your players in games like this is a very different ballgame. My favourite games are ones that teach you something about yourself but those lessons can be hard to swallow.

#39

Heya - since I’m half the rumour that Steph was talking about, thought I’d chip in.

On Sunday, I talked with a female player about Bad Dreams. I hadn’t met her before, didn’t know her name, and probably wouldn’t recognise her again - which is why I didn’t chip in earlier because I feel like an unreliable source, yeah?

From what I remember of the conversation, she said that the game finished, there was a short conversation and debrief, and everybody left. She said that she spent most of Saturday feeling sad and weird and unhappy and that the limited wind-out from the game was a direct cause of that sad and weird and unhappy. She didn’t talk about went on inside the game. From what I remember from the conversation.

I’m actually very interested in how Vanya et al. designed the latest Bad Dreams - design goals, structure, safety protocols, what you guys feel worked and what didn’t. If you guys would care to write up your notes in a formal way, I’d be delighted to read them.

I’m very interested in safety protocols right now. I walked the ground of Into the Woods observing Stephanie’s excruciatingly careful safety procedures, and I still got to worry hugely when two of the players had an intense negative experience as a result of the game. There were tears. There were also a lot of hugs afterwards, and unwinding from the game, and people making a point of being nice to each other, and we all seemed pretty happy by the end of it. So I think her safety net worked.

But yeah, as someone who once wrote a game which legitimately gave somebody nightmares, I’m interested in how to keep people’s psyches unfucked, yeah?

#40

[quote=“IdiotSavant”]

People can be mistaken about their own limits. They can have misunderstood the information provided about what will happen in the game. They might have understood that information, but things may have gone beyond what they implicitly consented to. They can have been actively deceived in order to avoid spoilers. These are real problems with edgy games, and they need to be addressed seriously by GMs, not just shrugged off and dumped in the players lap.[/quote]

It’s true that accidents can happen, and a shame when they do. I have sympathy for anyone who goes through something traumatic, regardless of what or how. I think my point still stands though that both GM and player need to take responsibility to ensure to the best of their ability that things don’t get ‘out of hand’ (a definition which, given some of the games that have been written, is clearly not a universal point).

This is the very reason why I wouldn’t try GR (Good lord!), but I felt completely safe throughout the entirety of Bad Dreams. There was certainly nothing just dumped into my lap without a thought.

#41

That’s certainly a lot better than what was on the blurb, and I fully appreciate both the efforts taken and the artistic aims of the game (and again, I’m glad that people are trying to do these sorts of games). At the same time, its still not entirely clear about what the players are in for (other than an intense psychological experience - which is advertising, not a warning - which will involve psychological and emotional abuse - which is a tad vague).

I also understand the need to avoid spoilers, but if its something you’d learn in the first few minutes of a three-hour larp, its not a spoiler. Unless there was a specific reason for secrecy, I don’t think it would have hurt to say upfront something like

“This game is inspired by the Stanford Prison Experiment (link). It will involve themes of power, authority, sadism and helplessness, as well as finding out how people react when placed in positions of authority over others. You may learn unpleasant things about yourself as a result.” (plus existing warnings about acting out physical violence, and on psychological and emotional abuse).

That way, people can find out what they’re in for before they’ve made a commitment to play.

(Personally, I was put off by the blurb, as not offering enough information to judge what the game was about and whether I wanted to play it. Plus, I was GMing that night. From the discusisons I’ve had with participants since, I’d likely play it if it was re-run).

#42

Trust was not just the Stanford, or the Milgram experiments, it is an amalgamation. The trick was to add enough to it so that it would work as a Game rather than as an Experiment. The lack of information is part of what we were building. My original impulse was to include the studies it was based off in the writeup but was convince against it. As it is, it can’t be rerun in the same way just because everybody already knows what the game is. The initial confusion and lack of information which results in character creation could only have been done that once.

#43

I understand that some of the players knew exactly what experiments were used as inspiration early on, so the secrecy may not have been necessary or effective.

But yes, blurb-writing is a shit, especially when you’re writing from just from the game concept rather than the full game.

Did that confusion make a difference? And would the lack of it really matter for a re-run? If they find out in the first five minutes anyway, and the core of the game is about how people respond under such circumstances, does knowing really make a difference to the gameplay? (It makes an obvious difference in terms of attracting players who are interested in the game, while not appealing to those who are not).

#44

Look, I’m not going to go into the details of the game publicly, with people who have not played it. We had reasons for it. Some knew the experiments, but not the majority and that being in rumor was fine.

#45

Although this thread has gone a tad off the original topic, I’d like to comment on where it’s gone, namely, Bad Dreams experience.

I’d been personally challenged separately by both Gaffy and Vanya to attempt one of their Bad Dreams games. I was aware of the nature that most of these games have, ie boundary pushing, some horror, R18, and so on. However, I’m not the sort of person who usually enjoys games of that nature, for example, I stay well away from Dreams in the Witch House. People know this of me, including Vanya & Gaffy.
So, when I applied for Bad Dreams this year, I did so on the knowledge that my friends who were running this game and had challenged/invited me to play also had a fair idea of how much they would be able to push me. I know Vanya deliberately asked for me to be put on the short list from the many who put BD as their first/second choice. I spent almost three weeks looking at the email (written above) trying to decide if I really did want to do this game, and after a further conversation with Vanya, I decided to give it a go. I did not regret the decision.

Now, I understand that as I’m a friend of the GMs of BD, my experience isn’t a fair test for every single one of the players. That said, the lead up to the game, and the game itself, I felt I was personally being stretched as a Larper, but also felt very within my comfort zone. I think the GMs did a good job overall, including giving a small amount of wind-down discussion at the end.

That said, my experience afterwards did lead me to think a more in depth discussion at the end may have been good - we got to talk about what had happened, but the fact is that not all of us are similar to myself, and can have emotions purged quickly. Even though I felt mostly fine as we went off to bed, I did spend the rest of Chimera dissecting BD and my own actions in the game in my head. It took a conversation with some other players after the whole event had ended to fully deal with some of the issues.

Now, that’s not entirely a bad thing, in fact IMO it is the point of BD.
That said, if I, who enjoyed the game, and am one who is able to purge emotions quickly, had to spend time dissecting it over a few days and further talks: is that a success on part of the game, or a worry for those people who hold on to their emotions?

I do not believe there is blame to be thrown around on this issue however, merely that a discussion about concerns is a good thing.

#46

i should like to point out the irony and hilarity of Vanya making other people bleed.

#endjoke

#47

oh and links galore! (pulled from lit review, which i fail hard at)
gamingaswomen.com/ has some awesome articles on this:

http://gamingaswomen.com/posts/2012/09/saying-no/

http://gamingaswomen.com/posts/2012/06/addressing-rape-in-your-game/

http://gamingaswomen.com/posts/2012/06/the-languages-of-sexuality-and-how-they-relate-to-game-design-and-game-play/

http://gamingaswomen.com/posts/2012/06/sensitive-stuff-at-the-gaming-table/