Free form Imrpov game vs rules and GM calls?

Community Larp discussion
#1

Ayesha’s note: moved from the Nibelungen forum. Can move back at Adam’s request.

Free form Imrpov game vs rules and GM calls?
I know Craig is very keen on the no rules approach, whereas I have decided that I prefer the rules with GM calls, especially in a whole weekend sci-fi game, and I thought I would put my reasoning down for discussion.
I find rules don’t create a hindrance but provide a structure, create atmosphere, provide limitations and help create the GM’s vision.
For example during the game some of the players were poisoned. The players came up with a solution, now this solution could have been really pathetic and sad, but was used anyway because there was no GM input, or the solution could have been brilliant and created some new plot device or story but again the GM’s don’t know about it.
Also it is to easy for inconstancies, augments and conflicts to arise, such as one player stating one thing and another stating another. Especially I imagine over a game that continues over multiple weekends.
Players can also take the easy option. I don’t recall seeing this at Nibbles, but I did see it at Mordavia, an example of something which really annoyed me for some reason and I saw a number of times was the wounded vampire turning round and saying ‘Well I will go into the larder and get 1 of the several bandits that I captured a couple of days ago and put in there’. Why can a vampire say he/she has several bandits handy, but the poor demon can’t say well I happen to have several healing potions that I stored in the larder as well? I think that if you had only one player who was playing it up, it would not have been good.
Also I have noticed that with Stargate, a game set on modern earth (even if sci-di) does not need any were as many GM calls as a fantasy game because people already know most of rules anyway
Making GM calls in a game like nibbles would have been easy I feel because the GM was always just down stairs or only a txt / call away, and a minute or 2 out of character to confirm something in a whole weekend is not a biggee(to me anyway).
I am also not saying that I think there should have been complex rules around hit points, combat or XP, but around Shaiki society and cause and effect.
So in summary it is my opinion that some rules with GM calls would have reduced confusion (such as players now being immune to sulphuric acid) and created more structure, atmosphere, more challenges and importantly would have been more fun overall.

#2

Actually, I thought there were HEAPS of GM calls during the game. But they were seemlessly incorporated into the game context via the ship’s AI.

So, how about we use the ship’s AI to make rulings. If the AI was constantly researching things via the internet (or directly, Orac-style), then 34601 could have entered a Confirm command and asked the AI to confirm that the preliminary results of her chemistry research did indeed result in a viable antidote formula.

Of course, the AI could always say “Unsure” and the PCs could take the risk of trying out a course of action anyway.

[quote]Players can also take the easy option. I don’t recall seeing this at Nibbles, but I did see it at Mordavia, an example of something which really annoyed me for some reason and I saw a number of times was the wounded vampire turning round and saying ‘Well I will go into the larder and get 1 of the several bandits that I captured a couple of days ago and put in there’. Why can a vampire say he/she has several bandits handy, but the poor demon can’t say well I happen to have several healing potions that I stored in the larder as well?[/quote].
I agree to an extent. Having a larder is fine if you procure bodies ingame, which I think they did. But since the larder wasn’t physrepped at all, no antivampire characters could do anything about it (if we’d found out where it was, the larder would have been bare thereafter). So it was more a matter of players inventing something and then concealing it from the others - not restricted to vampires, btw.

Which is entirely different to a daemon inventing a supply of healing potions - it’s more like a daemon inventing an invisible, undetectable bag-of-holding and storing legitimately procured healing potions in it (so the can’t be stolen ingame).

#3

[quote=“Mike Curtis”]

[quote]Players can also take the easy option. I don’t recall seeing this at Nibbles, but I did see it at Mordavia, an example of something which really annoyed me for some reason and I saw a number of times was the wounded vampire turning round and saying ‘Well I will go into the larder and get 1 of the several bandits that I captured a couple of days ago and put in there’. Why can a vampire say he/she has several bandits handy, but the poor demon can’t say well I happen to have several healing potions that I stored in the larder as well?[/quote].
I agree to an extent. Having a larder is fine if you procure bodies ingame, which I think they did. But since the larder wasn’t physrepped at all, no antivampire characters could do anything about it (if we’d found out where it was, the larder would have been bare thereafter). So it was more a matter of players inventing something and then concealing it from the others - not restricted to vampires, btw.

Which is entirely different to a daemon inventing a supply of healing potions - it’s more like a daemon inventing an invisible, undetectable bag-of-holding and storing legitimately procured healing potions in it (so the can’t be stolen ingame).[/quote]

Several times I saw people say on Friday night for example ‘I am going to get one of the bodies from the bandits I captured several days ago’ ie they were not captured in game but just did the old, well it has been said and so must now be true.

#4

I just thought of a cool game. Six bandits are captured by a vampire and tied up in the larder. Every 8-12 hours the vampire visits and takes one of the bandits. Screams are heard in the distance. You play a bandit. The door is opening … game on!

Back to the conversation at hand, I don’t think people should have a larder of bandits “out of game”. Of course if the GM saysd it’s okay then that’s fine.

I made a similar mistake NPCing as Sir Nigel of Hovan. We captured some players and dragged them off to the war room. They were effectively “out of game” when they should have been in game somewhere. There should have been the chance of a rescue.

#5

I agree there were lots of “GM calls” except everybody playing was actually the master of their own game. The game serves no other master.

You’re right that no rules sounds like a riskier approach if you want a high quality, highly valuable game. But you don’t bring up a specific time that the “system” actually failed, only examples of where it could have.

Then ironically, you’ve brought up an example of players creating a loophole in a game that does have rules :wink:

It’s easy to imagine a rule-less system collapsing entirely, but it didn’t happen that I’m aware of. I think that when players can make their own calls, they realise the importance of not ruining the game for themselves and others.

Here’s the poison issue as I saw it.

I never asked anybody to poison anyone - that was a player’s decision in the first place (temporary characters get little if any more direction than “players”). The player gave me a quick call and we had a quick chat about mechanics - but IMO this was unnecessary (I’d be happy to leave it up to them). Then, somewhere and somehow, someone got poisoned!

Later, players decided to make an antidote, and when they were satisfied with their efforts, decided it would work.

Fine by me. But you might say that “it’s only fine by you because it went well”. IMO, this is the worst way it could have gone:

Players turn up to meet a TC. TC wants to poison them but can’t because there are no rules for poison.

Here’s another really bad way:

Players get told they are poisoned and say “No I’m not.” (blocking)

Here’s another way I’d be happy with:

Players get poisoned and fall unconscious while attempting to make an antidote. Other players attempt to finish the mixture then feed it to the sleeping victim. Victim decides whether or not to wake up (and probably does wake up because it’s a neat game).

That last outcome would be even better because it involves other people saving their life. Awesome!

Basically, so long as the players concerned are satisfied with the whole thing, I don’t think there’s a problem. If one person starts “magically” solving all the problems then I don’t think people would be that keen to play with them, and the problem would solve itself.

You might argue that the system demands good role players. Good! I think a system that demands good role players will also breed good role players. It should remain really clear at all times that people are totally responsible for the quality of their own game.

If vampires suck the life out of a game I’d hope they’d get called up on it later. If you think someone blocked you unfairly or their role playing left something to be desired, let them know! Maybe they were still getting the hang of this whole “teamwork” thing, or maybe there was something else. Maybe they’ll realise that (what they did) didn’t improve the game and they’ll apologise. Maybe!

Often after games filled with rules, a deluge starts with rules that were bad/didn’t work. I think we’re doing better than that so far :wink:

Craig

#6

Classic.

The GMs found out about it after the fact. We groaned but didn’t take action to moderate it when we should have. The whole question of what was available in the way of a dungeon “under the keep” was always a messy imagined space and varied wildly between events. In retrospect we probably should have set one bunkroom aside as the dungeon and only allowed that to be used. Then put notes on the door saying how it was possible to get inside (e.g. dispelling an Adept Lock and then using a Strike Down attack).

As Mike says it should have been possible to interfere with the larder, and as Adam says there should have been monitoring of how many victims were available to be drained. In other words, when we heard about it we should have made the players set a room aside as the prison and put up a sign explaining what people saw when they entered and what they could do about it, with a place to record how many prisoners were currently in there that could be marked off when they got drained. Now and then we could have stocked it with actual NPCs (when we had them to spare) to give the feel of actually going to the larder to drain and possibilities of roleplay.

In other words, the more things that can be done as close to “live” as possible the better. Which I think is what Craig is actually aiming for, to bring this back on topic. It’s just hard to predict what characters might try to do, especially when the modern world is their playground.

#7

Unfortunately, I too have had concerns about this.

To formulate the antidote, what we did was analyse a sample of the poisoned cookie that we had been hoarding, along with having a 'borg analyse the antidote they had ingested earlier. Then, the Doctor and the Chemist combined their knowledge to discuss how to make an antidote. To make it more difficult than simple whipping up a concoction, we discovered that Vitalin was an important ingredient…right when Vitalin was gone!

I thought that this process was a fair estimation of both my character’s and the Doctor’s abilities. This was the only time my chemisty “ability” worked all weekend.

My other two attempts had less success.

My character’s analysis of the atmosphere through her handheld device had determined that the level of oxygen was harmful after two hours. Through monitoring the respiration of Craig Neilson aboard the ship, the device also determined that the level oxygen on the ship was too low for humans to stand for very long. I had no way of communicating this with the people coming aboard our ship (given that the alien’s best shot at getting an upper hand was to let the humans pass out and nick their gun) and even when I did, Nibelungen eventually overrode me the next morning saying the atmosphere was safe.

Later, my character made an attempt to do what should’ve been a simple enough feat for an alien chemist - use her chemicals to create a batch of sulfuric acid with which to poison someone. Despite us tricking a VC into drinking it (by claiming it was Vitalin) and duly informing her in character of what she was drinking, the only response we got was “It tastes funny.”

[quote=“Exquire”]Here’s another really bad way:

Players get told they are poisoned and say “No I’m not.” (blocking) [/quote]

In a game with GM-calls, I would’ve simply turned to a local GM and went “I try to make acid” and get informed of whether this was within my capabilities or not. Or gone “My character analyses the atmosphere” and been told what I find. The idea of ditching the GM call was to place the ball in my court, give me mastery of my game, but it didn’t feel like that at all. With both my contributions being blocked, I felt completely powerless in my capacity as a chemist.

I’m not sure where I went wrong. I guess I could’ve been over ambitious in my attempts, or unintentionally abusing the system.

#8

Thanks, Anna.

I panicked a bit when I heard you’d decided the atmosphere was unsafe for the aliens to exit the ship. I quickly imagined a game where TC’s came to visit 12 dying aliens rotting in a very hot, very dark ship, and it didn’t sound much fun. I’m not sure quite what you were playing at with this but I had to conclude the next morning (slept on it) that the ship had done further analysis and found it to be ok. Removing the ability to leave the starting room was just too much for anyone (TCs, players) to handle, I think, so we had no choice but to overcome that somehow. I guess in the end I didn’t have the heart to let the “nothing happens” larp take place. At least not this time. :wink:

Looking back on it, we could have played it by saying that the ship’s life support system has slowly synchronised with the atmospheric conditions overnight and that its crew members had been acclimatised without the shock of abundant oxygen.

If it had been a game set in a library and someone ran around with a fork making all the players blind… saving the game would be hard. Three of us stayed up quite late talking about how to save the game when you put the entire setting off-limits. Ultimately we decided that overnight analysis would have to prove you wrong.

Making Vitalin essential for the antidote was a great idea :slight_smile:

The sulphuric acid was a bit of a funny one. Not a bad idea, and you’d think it would have worked. Why didn’t it? You’d have to ask Malu. Personally I think that was pretty iffy on Malu’s part. She got told she’d drunk sulphuric acid but chose not to really be effected by it. A bit sad, when I heard about it I was confused, but the show must go on. Later on I found out that Vitalin addicts get a stomach lining that neutralises acids. Fancy that! Since it’s already happened we have no choice but to roll with it - but you should probably direct feedback to Malu too.

I also saw you analysing plant samples on the video. Another great idea - you can tell people that those are the source of all the oxygen. It would have been fine if, for the rest of the game, players avoided all living plants. Maybe there was some special effect on them if they hung around plants for too long. Maybe they could develop a fear of Victoria Park. That’s an example of where you could have taken it further - and been able to brief people on the chemical make-up of the planet in a way that didn’t cancel the game.

I thought overall you did a good job of chemistry. It’s not an “ability” that lets you solve problems, it’s a role playing offer that serves your character’s identity (after all, anyone can “solve problems”). Having a chemist there made for some great tests (if you guys would just LEAVE THE SHIP I could have got some photos!) and having you around made the science fiction quite lively. You fudged your way through plenty of chemical jargon, and that’s all anyone could have asked.

#9

Or got them all to manufacture & wear/drink some sort of device or drug to help them cope with the atmosphere. Then you could have distributed such devices/drugs to any aliens living on the planet. If there were any. That would have made a nice bit of integration when the players encountered other aliens and saw they needed life-support too.

Hindsight is always eagle-eyed. But sucessfully integrating unexpected player stuff that appears contrary to the vision can create interesting situations in the longer run, like the possibility of removing an alien’s life-support device and threatening not to return it. Challenges can create opportunities, when you say “yes, and”.

As the vampire larder example suggests, I certainly wouldn’t claim to be able to do integration properly all the time. But it’s definitely worth aspiring to. For example, if someone wanted to do a space walk you could say “yes, and you’ll need some magboots to keep you glued to the outside surface of the ship” so you don’t have to worry about zero-G.

#10

You should’ve seen the six aliens or so aliens that sortied out on Friday night when they encountered the trees.

Me: ARGH! THE SOURCE OF OXYGEN!
Aliens: jump back in terror
Captain: We must pass through this copse of trees HOLDING OUR BREATH!
Me: That would be safest.

It was pretty amusing.

I feel really bad that it came across that my intention was to cancel the game. I didn’t intend that. I intended a hurdle. I always hated it in sci-fi movies when the aliens land and the atmosphere is just fine.

The exact specifications of the oxygen overabundance were that we could leave the ship for two hours safely, and after about three hours we’d suffer permanent damage. Around four hours outside without returning to our atmosphere, we’d die. The aliens spent a lot of time discussing how we could overcome this, possibly some kind of chemical cure or building some kind of filter based on the technology in our space suits. In the end, we could’ve been sent to Kirsten the mean cyborg modder and been fitted with a chip that filters out excess oxygen. She’d have taken all our money and the Shikadi shirts off our backs, but hey - one’s gotta breathe somehow, right?

EDIT: And I wrote this before I saw what Ryan posted. His top paragraph pretty much along the lines I was thinking.

#11

Thanks. I failed chemistry at high school and this was my chance to make up for that!

Also, every time we left the ship, someone either paralysed us all, sent us into orbit or tried to take it from us. We were a little paranoid.

#12

Back to GM vs. Player plots…

I think that it depends on the game. I am heavily against largely GM games because they just scream god complex. It should be a last resort, like at the pirates game - “Alright, this is taking too long… this is what happens”

But leaving things to the players I think is unfair. It means too much chaos.

Happy medium please!

#13

That depends on the players and the larp I think. If the larp is designed with a framework that encourages continuous PC interaction then it doesn’t need any organiser input. But that takes a lot of OOC rules to enforce the framework, which isn’t the style that Craig is looking for.

In Craig’s low-rules (except those built into machines) approach, it’s up to players to make it work and that does put a big onus on them. But I’ve heard of larps like that working too. Personally I think I like a bit of framework better, but maybe I just haven’t played the right low-framework larp yet.

I think whether a larp is largely based on the players’ actions and whether it has a rules framework are two separate things, not to be confused.

#14

I did not mean for people to go in depth on this vampire thing, I used this as it is a well know example of what can happen when players have the oppurtunity to make stuff up, and go for the easy option.

#15

This was probably not such a good call on my part. Sorry for the block Anna. Thinking on it later in the evening I was trying to come up with plot explanations that didn’t suck to redeem the questionable call. I did, but it still wasn’t my golden larping moment. Having said that, it is now plot and will have to be dealt with in a feasible way (I think it will be).

Also a tip to TC’s. Playing a mad character without spending a reasonable bit of time working on the consistency of your character leads to problems. ‘Malu Fink’ (all three of her) is getting a character write up to lessen the need for off the cuff history creation. She inevitably ended up contradicting herself, and while mad and totally incoherent and incapable of consistency, this also makes an easy cop-out for poor role-playing. Not something that should happen. My bad.

#16

At acting school we played a similar version of this that was set in Brazil, we were a bus load of tourists that happened to witness the murder of a police officer and the El Generalisimo beleived that one of us was the killer, he would select a victim interrogate them a bit and then lead them outside where a loud “Bang” like a gunshot was heard.

The only rules we were given were 1 we have to completely belive it is real and 2 we were not allowed to physically attack the teacher.

it got pretty intense with people breaking down and having to be dragged out and others accusing people at random of being the murderer, and one guy who just marched from the room to his death with his head held high, pillock :unamused: .

#17

Yeah, it is difficult sometimes to extract myself from the plot. Being a GM is hard because I have played in Pirates so I have who I want to win. It’s interesting having to step back and be like “No, in this situation, this would happen”

As for completely player run LARPs yes- for the skilled Improver and the right set up a completely player driven LARP could be fun. The problem here is that when you limit the special abilities of people, the game mechanics, when you limit it to the point of saying things like you can only speak another language if you can ACTUALLY speak that language it can limit the game itself. That’s a tangent. Realtiy vs. imagination and acting. When is a LARP real life?

#18

This is kind of related, and it’s a thought that’s been circling in my head ever since I played Maelstrom.

There’s a funny relationship between immersion and creation. If you (the player) are inventing parts of the fiction, how does that sit with being immersed in a character who isn’t capable of inventing the surrounding world (or even his own backstory) on the fly? I would have thought the two are kind of mutually exclusive.

Stuff that you write before the event shouldn’t be such a problem, you can put out of mind the fact that you created it while you are playing in it. But having to think about what you’re creating while trying to immerse in it… I would have thought that’d be an additional hurdle to immersion.

Of course, sometimes you just have to invent things. For example, if someone starts asking your character things that they should know but you haven’t invented yet (e.g. about your family or upbringing) then what do you do? You have to think of something, and while doing that you’re not playing as your character but inventing it.

Worse yet, what if you invent something about a background shared with another player, and they invent something, and the two things conflict? Then you can get into a conversation that’s very counter-immersive. This was the situation at Maelstrom that got me thinking about this.

My conclusion to this “creation vs. immerison” dilemma is that if you want to maximise immersion, the common background needed during live play should be created before the larp, and imparted to players in a way that will stick so that they know it as well as their characters do. That’s quite a big ask, and totally doesn’t fit with my previous thoughts about improv-style creation and immersion working together.

Alternatively, you can combine goals of creation and immersion but realise that immersion may suffer for it.

Or train people to create stuff while still feeling immersed.

#19

[quote=“Ryan Paddy”]

My conclusion to this “creation vs. immerison” dilemma is that if you want to maximise immersion, the common background needed during live play should be created before the larp, and imparted to players in a way that will stick so that they know it as well as their characters do.[/quote]

This is a good summary of part of what I was trying to say.
I personally do not consider myself a good actor and don’t like imrpov or creating large chunks of my character during a larp as it makes me feel out of character and feel like I am being put on the spot, not like say Lucy and Carl who are trained in it or a lot of the other larpers who are naturals (and is one of the reasons why I avoided being in the Robin Hood larp and don’t do medieval displays.)
If a larp has some rules around the society, how it works, structure, whos whos etc it would have meant I had the background knowledge before the game and this would have greatly helped in my immersion in the larp.