tl;dr: someone on the internet has an opinion, it’s got something to do with LARP theory.
[size=150]Introduction[/size]
Having read a whole bunch of debates (some quite old now by the standards of the internet), I’ve come to the conclusion that there is no “right” way to run a LARP. However, there are some things that please certain people more than others when it comes to LARP. There are certain aspects to LARP that define it, such as the immersion, the story (if there is one), the improvisation, the influence on events by the players, and the game or system aspect to it. By no means are these the only defining attributes of LARP, but they are things that are generally found to oppose one-another (unless you have an incredibly inventive LARP writer, of which there are a few).
This is an exploration of agency in LARP. By that I mean; what is important to the LARP, and what influences it (both in creation and in playing). The four aspects that appear to be most popular and most important to people I have asked and reviewed the discussions of are the following; immersion, narrative, game, and player agency. All of these elements come at the sacrifice of the others. These things are explored in the following sections.
[size=150]Immersion[/size]
Immersion in LARP is generally a feeling of how real it is, and how immersed you are in it to the point where disbelief is completely suspended, or there is no suspension if disbelief necessary. There are a great many methods to achieve immersion; from all the props being exactly what they’re meant to be, to hosting the game at a venue that matches the LARP’s setting, to having everyone in the LARP roleplay very strictly in-character and to the norms of the setting, to making the soft-skill system represent similar actions in the real world with similar actions required to perform them.
An ultimate form of immersion would be where everything is exactly what it looks like, and literally does what it is meant to in the setting. Although this sounds a little too close to real life to be very fantastical. Often LARP creators will try and up the immersion without sacrificing the other elements of their LARP. This commonly takes the form of more impressive set dressing, costumes, and props. Another form it can take is where the events in the game are reactions to the actions of the players. There are also many other methods for upping the immersion in LARP.
[size=150]Narrative[/size]
The narrative of a LARP is generally the story that is told by the actions of the players, NPCs, and setting. Achieving narrative can take the form of requiring the players to attempt to achieve a specific ending for their characters, to setting the LARP out into a series of pre-defined scenes, to players reacting in-character in a manner that makes the story more interesting rather than how their character might actually act.
An ultimate form of narrative is where every event is scripted, the outcomes pre-determined, and all the player lines scripted. This makes the people involved sound a lot more like actors than players. Narrative is often pursued as a goal when a specific point is intended to be put across, or a desired story to be told. Without sacrificing the other elements of LARP completely, narrative is generally pursued by using invulnerable NPCs, mixing character background to give the characters and players IC reasons to get involved in the main plot, and by telling the players of events after-the-fact.
[size=150]Game[/size]
The game aspect of a LARP is commonly considered to be inherited from tabletop roleplay, and is represented by systemic representations of things that are difficult to perform in actuality, puzzles, and other things that share similarities with mechanistic arcade games and tabletop roleplay. Gamist approaches to LARP can take the form of systemic or mechanistic character development, and small mini-games or puzzles used instead of actual actions, among others.
An ultimate form of game is where all actions take the form of minigames and everything is dealt with in a systemic manner. This strongly represents board games and arcade games. The game aspect of a LARP is often pursued as a throw over from tabletop, as well as to give OOC satisfaction to those who prefer mind-games, puzzles, and a strategic approach to LARP. Without disposing of the other elements of LARP, gameism takes the common forms of mini-game conflict resolution, unrelated puzzles to do things such as unlock chests, and systemic character development relying on some value system and skill gain or similar that can then be used to influence the game in a systemic manner.
[size=150]Player Agency[/size]
Player agency in LARP is considered to be how much influence the player has on the LARP setting and how important the players are considered to be for the purposes of the LARP. Achieving player agency can take the forms of allowing the players to change aspects of the world to suit their character concept, putting events into the game that are direct setting-responses to the actions of the player, having no NPCs, and/or generally leaving the story up to the players rather than any agency from outside the immediate setting.
The ultimate form of player agency is where the players are the game masters and there are no non-player characters. How enjoyable the event is, or what direction it takes, is then entirely up to the players to decide and create. Player agency is often pursued by introducing NPCs that are detailed in a characters background, or by allowing the players to directly influence the course of events in the LARP, or by having all of the characters within the game played by players.
[size=150]Immersionist vs Gamist[/size]
I have seen a lot of people who value immersion complaining about those who treat LARP as if it were a game, and those who treat it as a game generally ignoring the immersion or saying it is unimportant. The higher the immersion, the less system or soft-skills you will find in a LARP. The higher the game attribute, the more distractions you will have from the immersion. Immersionist and Gamist approaches to LARP, whether from a player perspective or a GM perspective, are in direct competition. That is, however, not to say that you cannot have one without the other.
[size=150]Narrativist vs Playerist[/size]
A lot of games that focus on producing a certain story generally take away from the agency of the players. The more a particular storyline is attempted to be achieved, the less influence the players have in determining what they do and what happens in the setting. Narrativist and Playerist approaches to LARP are in direct competition with each other. Although again, you can have both being prominent in a LARP.
[size=150]Between Immersion and Player Agency[/size]
Immersion and Player Agency work together well, in that ultimate player agency is not necessarily un-immersing, and ultimate immersion does not necessarily detract from player agency. A mix of the two could take the form of a LARP that has accurate set dressing, props, and costumes, and allows the players to dictate the course of events by providing setting-reactions to the actions of the players towards NPCs.
[size=150]Between Player Agency and Game[/size]
Player Agency and a Gamist approach to LARP are not in conflict, and can work very well together. Providing a systemic way in which the players can influence the LARP setting and other characters is an enabling way to give agency to the players. Somewhere between the two sits systemic character development, systemic character influence, influential mini-games, and similar.
[size=150]Between Game and Narrative[/size]
Game and Narrative are things that have commonly been combined, both in and outside of LARP. Games can be made part of the story, or sit completely aside from it, as these two aspects are not in competition. A LARP that incorporates both these aspects may feature a game as part of the main story, mini-games to unlock the next segment of the plot, or a generally more strategic approach to story progression.
[size=150]Between Narrative and Immersion[/size]
Narrative and Immersion can work very well together, if combined in such a way that one adds to the other. Within LARP, a poor narrative can kill the immersion, and poor immersion can distract from the story. A LARP somewhere between the two that combines both elements could contain mood lighting and set dressing to emphasise the mood of the current scene, or an event that fits with the overarching story and blends with the rest of the setting seamlessly. These things can work well to compliment each other, but when in dissonance, can destroy one-another.
[size=150]Conclusion[/size]
Most of these elements can work together in such a way that they benefit each other, or at least do not detract from one-another. Each of them is something that some people prefer, but not everyone. In a place where there is more supply than demand, you may need to run a game that is tailored to the preferences of the community in order to attract players. In places where there is more demand than supply, you have a greater opportunity to experiment and set a precedent in relation to these 4 aspects of LARP (and all the other aspects too!). Although as long as the LARPing community in your area has enough people, you could run almost any kind of LARP and attract players who are interested in that sort of LARP.
If you’re incredibly inventive, I’m certain that the aspects I have proposed as opposing can be combined to work harmoniously. However, it’s a lot easier to create a LARP that does not try to force these oppositions together.
[/2c]
Your thoughts?
