Frequency of Play - will we jump the shark?

Community Larp discussion
#21

[quote=“Zari”]
That said, I don’t think too much in the way of plot etc should be delivered by GMs at player-held events. Discussion of existing plot, maybe, but not delivery of anything new. Save that for the GM-created day games, I think that’s fairer on the players.[/quote]

The issue here, and one thing I think every single person I’ve heard talking about this is forgetting, is that this is a faction based game.

The GMs would have to run 5-3 day games between every game in order to release plot, and release extensive and personal plot for each faction - flavour designed and all.

When you have players designing their own events, and then dropping plot into that, the deeply personal setting and premise of the game is done by the organizers of the event, with the flavour already set up (like the Fire Festival, or the Sachsen Feast).

Faction based game on this scale is a new thing, and it needs to try new stuff to try and accommodate it. People need to realize it’s not fluffy bunnies get along time, and that the GMs are trying to run a game for five competing groups.

I mean, technically there is the capacity to turn it into fluffy bunny get along, but a lot of the players I know who have issues with faction based gaming, are also very isolationist with their faction things.

Long story short: Player designed games remove 60% of the tedious work for the GMs, and to have the expectations of the GMs to do that much work is self entitled, and wrong.

It’s a factions game guys, if you wanna run RP in regards to your faction, no one is stopping you, and no one but the GMs can.

#22

Quick run through on all of the above:

Jordan. I agree, why do we feel we must attend all the things? Great question dude :slight_smile: As for the faction based aspect of THIS game? I don’t really care about IC stuff tbh. What everyone does IC to each other isn’t cause for my concern except for where it causes me more work :stuck_out_tongue:

Which leads me to Nik’s post:

Couldn’t agree more. Watching my dear friends, who have held me together when I fall apart, tearing into each other OOC for a GAME? I am hating this, loathing it tbh. You’re hurting each other, yourselves, your partners and your friends (and by extension me) for a game! I’m watching relationships crumble, friendships founder and people not talking to each other over this! :frowning:

Martin has some salient points too. The FB thing, the immediacy. I love getting excited to go play with you all, to hang out with you all and I do feel like I’M missing out when I can’t make them. For me this is a thing shrug I miss stuff all the time. Other things take priority in my life.

The hate mail though? Yeah, not so fond of that. Not so fond of seeing other people affected by it. Nor the abuse, the bullying.

#23

Martin is absolutely right that the perception of “saturation” is a cultural issue.

My greatest experiences of gaming have been Auckland and London, and 2-3 games (tabletop or LARP) available every week (or more) is normal. The idea that there might be too much, or that people might stop RPing because of “saturation” (beyond the natural constraints of RL) is inconceivable.

There are two major problems that I see:

  1. The game was intended to run with part of the ST team in Wellington, which (due to the withdrawal of those in Wellington who were originally involved) is no longer true.

  2. For whatever reason PC organized events are not happening in Wellington for the STs to sanction and support.

Neither of these issues has anything to do with the frequency of play (well, apart from there being NOT ENOUGH in Wellington) but is instead to do with organization and logistical challenges.

Given that players can (and have) received downtime XP without attending downtime events, due to the lack of available games in their geographic location, and the fact that (whatever people are saying) there is no new story being introduced at the “ST sanctioned” events (simply ST support for existing story and PC generated events) I still don’t credit the claims of “disadvantage” as genuine. However, as a good friend once told me, perception IS real. More needs to be done about the perception of disadvantage, however wrong that idea is in reality.

And I think that someone from the Wellington community stepping up to the mark as an ST and more proactivity/greater determination regarding running geographically convenient PC initiated events (there is no reason why there couldn’t be a Gnosis point event simultaneously in Auckland and Wellington, or on following weekends) will really help a lot. That’s not all (I’ve already mentioned others above) that needs to happen, but it’d be a damn good start.

#24

“The idea that there might be too much, or that people might stop RPing because of “saturation” (beyond the natural constraints of RL) is inconceivable.”

Really? When there’s no escape, and it becomes obligation to ‘keep up’, and there’s daily frustration being voiced as well, you can’t imagine that having a negative impact?

Different analogy: going from eating chocolate on special occasions, to eating chocolate for every meal. Too much of a good thing!

#25

[quote=“Admiral”]
And I think that someone from the Wellington community stepping up to the mark as an ST and more proactivity/greater determination regarding running geographically convenient PC initiated events (there is no reason why there couldn’t be a Gnosis point event simultaneously in Auckland and Wellington, or on following weekends) will really help a lot. That’s not all (I’ve already mentioned others above) that needs to happen, but it’d be a damn good start.[/quote]

I would absolutely put my hand up to do this (but whether or not I’d be accepted is another question entirely) but I’d like confirmation that the problem of abuse being addressed first - friends have been driven away from this game and I’d like to see some consequences for this behavior. I don’t want to support anything that lets people get away with this sort of behavior.

Like I keep saying, I love this game and I want it to succeed. I believe entirely in what Patrick and the other GMs are doing. I am invested in this game. But my friends’ wellbeing comes first.

#26

At the risk of generalising, a lot of Aucklanders don’t seem to see the problem we’re having - or, at the very least, they think it’s a problem that’s being caused by a lack of proactivity in Wellington. I think it’d be great to have more IC events in Wellington, but that ultimately won’t solve the issue I’ve been seeing here. I think there’s too much emphasis being placed on introducing factional plot between sessions, whereas I’m suggesting the opposite. If you introduce factional plot between sessions, then you’re right, Jordan, the GMs would need to run 4 or 5 events, and people will still complain that they weren’t able to make it to an event, and we’ll still be down here wondering if we’ll ever meet a character from another faction if they don’t already live in our neighbourhood IRL. I think factional plot should be introduced in the weekend games, but otherwise, it should be used sparingly. If the IC events minimise mechanical benefits, and don’t build into the overall plot as much, then they become events that you attend if you want to, rather than events that you need to attend in order to keep your character at a level that functions in the game.

I don’t want to seem like I’m nitpicking, but I see these arguments a lot. The whole ‘we’re not meant to be playing nice, this is a war’ thing. And yeah, it’s a war. For our characters. The RL stuff, the bullying, the smack talk, the dismissing of arguments based on technical points, the fact that every time a DT action result comes back, or someone suggests running an event, there’s suddenly 76 increasingly nasty comments? None of that needs to exist. None of it should exist.

In the last twenty-four hours, I’ve seen a lot of my friends behaving like petulant toddlers, and I’ve seen three people give at least serious consideration to quitting this game for good. The game sometimes seems to be falling apart, and I honestly don’t know if it’ll reach the finish line. Nik’s right: Crucible is an unhealthy environment, and it’s not the GMs’ fault. It’s the fact that nobody can bite their tongue when they need to, and the fact that no matter how it gets organised, the game still seems to favour Auckland players.

#27

[quote=“RobotPie”][quote=“Admiral”]
And I think that someone from the Wellington community stepping up to the mark as an ST and more proactivity/greater determination regarding running geographically convenient PC initiated events (there is no reason why there couldn’t be a Gnosis point event simultaneously in Auckland and Wellington, or on following weekends) will really help a lot. That’s not all (I’ve already mentioned others above) that needs to happen, but it’d be a damn good start.[/quote]

I would absolutely put my hand up to do this (but whether or not I’d be accepted is another question entirely) but I’d like confirmation that the problem of abuse being addressed first - friends have been driven away from this game and I’d like to see some consequences for this behavior. I don’t want to support anything that lets people get away with this sort of behavior.[/quote]

I’d agree with this. If the abuse can be presented and addressed, and the accusations warranted, then the appropriate warnings or reprimands need to be put in place.

However, I don’t agree that “Someone disagreed with me, they refused to agree with me, so funk them and their attitude I’m leaving.” is someone being abused out of the game.

#28

[quote=“Helikaon”][quote=“RobotPie”][quote=“Admiral”]

However, I don’t agree that “Someone disagreed with me, they refused to agree with me, so funk them and their attitude I’m leaving.” is someone being abused out of the game.[/quote][/quote][/quote]

My understanding of that situation was that it wasn’t just one disagreement, it was the inbox full of bile they received from more than one other player. If I was to leave the game now, it would have nothing to do with DT actions or GM sanctioned events. It would be because people think that sending someone multiple messages over any channel of that nature is an OK thing to do and then the GMs ignoring it. One person’s “Strongly worded message” may not come across that way to the receiver, especially if there’s more than one.

I know I’ve been guilty as hell of bleed or generally arguing in an unhelpful manner, especially in regards to Crucible, but then I think I’ve been pretty successful until recently at standing back and thinking “is saying this improving matters? Or am I just inflaming the problem?” I hope other people will start doing the same.

#29

I believe what you’re saying about the way those events are being run, and there’s a lot of evidence to support that. But I want to point out that something that seems really simple, like offering people opportunities to swap in-game information, appears to provide a lack of balance, particularly if you don’t live in Auckland.
I’m going to use the Gnosis Point Symposium as an example, not because I think there’s a deep problem with the way it’s being run, but because I really want to attend, so I’ve had a greater chance to analyse my feelings about it. I can handle not being able to attend an event, and I can handle the lack of options to broadcast that event to a wider audience. But I can see a real issue with offering an option to swap IC information in an event like that. The Gnosis Point symposium will probably have ample support from Korashur, Valeria, the Draz’har, and Alteraan. The Hounds are hosting. But the Sachsen boots on the ground are going to be fewer. And what that does is it has the potential to advance the game without a group of players. If it were a matter of apathy on our part, then I’d say that it was fine, let the Sachsens miss out, but it’s not.
Now imagine that you’re one of us, and rather than it being one opportunity to gain information, to roleplay, whatever, it’s two, or three, between every weekend game. I know that you can only play in one day game, but as far as I know, that prohibition isn’t in place for GM-sanctioned events. The game keeps moving. Everyone else is playing in it, but because you’re unable to make six flights in two months, you miss out on all of that. People learn spells, gain information, form alliances, and your faction sits stagnant around you.
They’re not sitting stagnant because they don’t want to do anything, just that the only events they can organise will attract other members of their faction, so there’s not a lot of information to be gained. We wind up with incredibly rich interpersonal relationships, but we don’t get to participate in the game the way that everyone else does. And every time we mention this, it gets brushed off like it’s not a problem.

#30

In summary, I concur with Amphigori’s starting post, (other than downtime actions, I don’t mind them).

So, a big issue made of smaller issues.
Two of these are:

  1. Access to GMs: There is a perception (this may be unfounded, but that does seem unlikely) that GMs are providing a lot of official sanction/advice outside of official channels. Is this due to player pressure? It seems likely. I’m as guilty as anyone, but since the last chapter, I’ve certainly been trying to limit myself to official channels. My opinion on the answer to this one seems to be sterner self-policing by players and probably a stronger face on it from GMs. This is partially a problem because sometimes the official channel can take a while, but I suspect we’ve got an unfortunate feedback cycle here.
    Fundamentally, if something needs official sanction, and if you go through official channels, you take the unofficial channel pressure off the GMs. From personal experience, I can guarantee you that having one worklist (without constant interruption from other channels) from which to triage tasks/responses is a lot more efficient and a lot less soul-destroying.

  2. Events:
    I think the major issue that has been highlighted here is the idea of GM-sanctioned events and GM-run events. musicforwolves touches on this as well.
    This is a tricky one, and has become a little heated, to put it mildly, in other discussions.
    So, here are some thoughts:

  3. There is no stopping player-run events, and why would we want to.

  4. GM “sanction” is, I assume, used so that things that are plot-important and mechanics-important are canonical.

  5. If an event is not plot-important or mechanics-important, then there is no need to make it canonical, and therefore sanction it.

  6. If an event is plot-important, then it should be advertised/arranged, at the same level of priority as a day game.

  7. If an event contains mechanics-important things, then as above, it should be as important as a day game, unless they are minor enough that they could be handled via official channels like updating the google doc, with a comment/email checking permission.

  8. This all leads us into the observation, that while there is nothing intrinsically wrong with having 5 or so day games between every chapter, we should accept that that is what is happening.

  9. This creates a pressure on the player base to be able to attend all of these day games so as not to miss out on plot-important stuff defining the chronicle and mechanics-important stuff that is important for having a competitive build in a PvP game.

  10. I suspect we’d find that we can condense the plot-important stuff into the day and weekend games to only need one or two day games per chapter. This means that the rest can just be for fun.

  11. The GMs have stated explicitly that players can only attend one day game per chapter as their PC. Any event sufficiently plot-important/mechanics-important to warrant being made canonical by a GM should fall into this category. If we, as a player base want more plot-important/mechanics-important events, then we need to have a discussion around that.

#31

This should be posted publicly and the people who are sending the insulting messages should be called out. That’s not on, and is full on abuse, and whoever that has been done to should print screen the messages and email the messages to the GM so that they can do something about it.

The GM team can only do something about it when the issue is raised with them.

#32

I’m hoping the affected parties do…but if they don’t think they’re going to get results, they won’t. But I’m also all for people looking at the way they discuss this game online and deal with disagreement. There is so much to love about this game and the people who play it…or so I thought. I really hope that this crisis prompts people to take a step back and think about how they come across online. I will, I haven’t exactly been covering myself in glory recently. And I can hope people will do the same.

#33

I hope they do as well. To assume they wont get assistance only ensures they won’t, so to not come forward with the evidence will only harm the entire game and process. It would be entirely beneficial for them to bring the complaint forward.

#34

[quote=“amphigori”]“The idea that there might be too much, or that people might stop RPing because of “saturation” (beyond the natural constraints of RL) is inconceivable.”

Really? When there’s no escape, and it becomes obligation to ‘keep up’, and there’s daily frustration being voiced as well, you can’t imagine that having a negative impact?

Different analogy: going from eating chocolate on special occasions, to eating chocolate for every meal. Too much of a good thing![/quote]

I think you missed my point.

Before there even was a Crucible I already gamed with as much of my spare time as I possibly could.

There is NOT any such thing as too much gaming as far as I am concerned (and I find the idea that there could be confusing). The idea that Crucible alone is enough to make anyone go “woah, this is TOO MUCH” sounds pretty amusing when I’m playing in two other LARPs and two tabletop RPGs and still finding time for boardgaming, cardgaming, console gaming and wargaming as well. And to be blunt, I don’t think that it is a problem with Crucible if any individual doesn’t want to be involved in all the parts of it.

Crucible is intended to be more than a weekend game run twice a year and a day game in between. That people want to do more is a success, not a failure, and the idea that they should be discouraged from making the game more is small minded. But from the very beginning a few things have been clear:

  1. No one player will be able to be involved in all things.

  2. No player has to be involved in anything to have a full experience of the game (except the weekend games I suppose, those are pretty critical).

  3. The game is based on factions, will have stories for factions and involve conflict between those factions.

  4. To run the game on the scale intended requires drawing on more than the Auckland community, which requires local support for local events (which has been difficult since the withdrawal of the Wellington STs) as well as for the major weekend games.

  5. Weekend games, personal downtime, factional downtime, ST generated day games, ST sanctioned player generated events and player generated events are all part of Crucible, but refer point 1.

It’s fair enough however to suggest that if player generated events are going to be sanctioned by the STs then they should be treated the same way as ST generated day games. And I’d like to see more done to break down the false perception of advantage which has been created, and is being sustained by the lack of events in Wellington and direct support from a Wellington based ST or STs. Though I do notice the lack of discussion of other key centers in these conversations, what of Hamilton (for example) and the players there?

#35

I think the inability of people to do things - for whatever reason - is why online RP is a good thing.

I know it doesn’t fix the ‘problem’ (if there is one) but, perhaps, for the Gnosis event, if a player thinks a spell/knowledge is particularly useful/wanted they could trade for a scroll with the spell written on which they, then, later, pay the gnosis for? The scroll could be presented to a faction member (of their faction) present at the event and then destroyed once the appropriate person learns the spell (the said player being unable, thanks to logistics, to make the event thus not missing out on the mechanical thing)

In the bigger scheme of things, I think as long as there is opportunities to gain things like gnosis/knowledge/experience thats relatively equal across the board, then whether or not someone is able to attend everything is immaterial. Sometimes things happen in RL and we cannot do everything, all the time. It makes sense in a Larp as well. Or your not welcome somewhere irl, ala in, what is a factional, game. I think there is a lot of bending over backwards to allow NPC’s to attend factional events as it is when organisers of a faction event could, in theory, just not bother that we should be applauding that instead of getting bogged down in dogmatic us vs them. There are ways to solve the perceived stagnation - such as my theory above - that we can work towards achieving.

Eh, anyway, just my 2 pence there.

#36

I hope they do as well. To assume they wont get assistance only ensures they won’t, so to not come forward with the evidence will only harm the entire game and process. It would be entirely beneficial for them to bring the complaint forward.[/quote]

It would, and I’ve asked for it in the hopes that things can be set right. I do, however, strongly suspect that a desire to avoid more abuse and name-shaming is behind the reluctance to give me access to them. Understandable certainly. In the mean time, I hope people are giving conscious thought to messages they’ve sent recently, making sure their hearts are clear. Doing the same thing as we progress forward would be a useful exercise as well :slight_smile:

Btw Fraser? Great points and nicely laid out mate :slight_smile:

#37

[quote=“Admiral”]
the idea that they should be discouraged from making the game more is small minded. [/quote]

THIS. This is not constructive nor helpful. This sort of thing is inflammatory and derisive. It is an aspect of the problem that several others here have already addressed. Calling people “close minded” for disagreeing with you will only raise hackles, not get them to agree with your position. Quite the opposite in fact.

#38

Any feedback on my points raised earlier? I’m trying to come up with a coherent, brief summary to present to the GMs. I’d appreciate the time spent to give me feedback.

#39

Your point about GM sanctioned events being the same as day games in the sense that primary characters can only attend one of these is by far your strongest.

It helps to mitigate double sharing knowledges and spells earned in day games, and other events. I think it’s a great idea.

#40

:frowning:

Yeah, Jason I do get that you personally love a higher volume of gaming than I probably do. I -do- put a lot of man hours into my primary game, which in this case is Crucible. And I put a lot of effort into it as well, not only for myself, but for others. But in order to do that, I need some downtime to process, plan, evaluate, do things, etc … And I find the current pace too full on to do that. I feel rushed, I feel like stories change too fast, people’s IC behaviour changes too fast, and plans I start putting in motion become moot/outdated almost overnight.

Sorry if I’m not explaining myself clearly. It is a bit mean to call me small minded though :confused: