Light head shots

Community Larp discussion
#61

Hang on, you wanted to know what the advantages were in terms of what it brings to the game, not in terms of mainstream acceptance. No one is saying that allowing headshots will result in mainstream acceptance. Does a game have to mainstream to be worthwhile ?

Sure, down in the 'Tron, you might need to go mainstream to get a critical mass, but no so in places like the UK, or perhaps even Auckland.

I think Ryan makes a pretty good case for the advantages for allowing headshots, especially the one about not stopping the game while someone whinges about getting an accidental headshot (this is certainly true in Skirmish, players tend to celebrate rather than whinge and combat is seldom disrupted).

And here’s another reason:

When players make bodyshots, they tend to do so at a velocity that is inappropriate for a headshot. This explains why accidental headshots can be quite jarring - the weapon was travelling quite fast because there was no intention to hit the target’s head.

So, under current rules, 100% of stikes are travelling at bodyshot velocity, and some of these will result in accidental headshots.

So, if light headshots are allowed, then x% of will travel at bodyshot speed and y% will travel at headshot speed (i.e. lower speed), where x + y = 100.

So, there will be fewer stikes at bodyshot velocity. Ergo, combat will be safer overall.

#62

Still to see Advantages. I see results that can achieved other ways for little extra effort, but no real advantages.

Still waiting to hear how this affects game balance.

As to bodyshot/headshot speed arguement. No body shot should be hard enough so that it causes damage if it hits the head, or other non-target areas. So it should make no difference to the strike speed/power whatsoever. Unless, of course, you guys hit harder than us.

By the logic presented earlier, “Allowing head shots will reduce the amount of head hits”, we can see this is flawed. Our system allows no head hits. By this logic body hits will cause little damage because they are allowed and head shots will cause lots of damage because they are disallowed. This is the total opposite of what we have observed.

Apply the 6 hats arguement to it and see what the results are.

#63

[quote=“Mike Curtis”]
I think Ryan makes a pretty good case for the advantages for allowing headshots, especially the one about not stopping the game while someone whinges about getting an accidental headshot (this is certainly true in Skirmish, players tend to celebrate rather than whinge and combat is seldom disrupted).[/quote]

Maybe we are made of sterner stuff here in Hamilton - I have never seen combat stopped due to an accidental headshot except when it impacted on someone’s glasses - and not always then. Usually there is a very brief “are you ok?” pause followed by immediate resumption of combat.

Bearing in mind that we are not a bunch of gung-ho fight 'til you drop blokes - even in our hey day where we could expect 25< players for a game, we had the largest % of female players of any LRP system we knew of in the country.

One of the things this thread has demonstrated is something else I have noticed in other opinion polls on Diatribe - people are frequently attacked for expressing a personal opinion. Granted, some people do seem to be deliberately provocative, but remember people, these are personal opinions being expressed here; to which we are all entitled, and should not have to endure personal attacks for expressing. Attack the opinion rather than the person.

#64

I don’t think game balance is relevant, assuming you mean “balance of capabilities of characters”. A light headshot rule would apply equally to all players and crew.

In terms of player loss, once people got used to it the attrition would not be 50%. People have a tendency to stick to what they until a new thing proves its merit. But cultures do change.

If light headshots had been allowed from the start in some larps here, we’d be having a very different conversation. It’s curious that apart from Jared opponents here have not addressed the fact that their criticisms do not seem to apply in practice in the UK, where I believe light headshots are allowed at the Gathering, Renewal, and Maelstrom: larps with between 800 and 2000 participants on the field.

#65

does it really matter ?
Alista you really like to try and counter any pro headshot argument don’t you , Ryan stated advantages YES they can be seen as advantages.
No you might not see them as advantages but thats YOU.
some people (like me) do see them as Advantages and I am exactly the kind of person that would be playing in that kind of LARP.

so what I’m getting at is this. Maybe. just maybe. you won’t be playing in a Headshot game in the future. I dunno! the song and dance your putting on just makes me think you won’t be attending- oh well.

#66

I’m against head shots. I don’t trust everyone’s grasp of self-control and common sense in the heat of battle.

#67

I think I missed something. I’ve been reading and participating in this thread but I have missed something obvious.
That is:
[size=150]The percieved advantage of head shots[/size]
What will it actually add to a game? Ok another hit location.
I get that, fantastic for the trained swordsmen who want the added realism. Its just to me its not that good an advantage on its own and that seems reflected in the minds of the majority of respondents here.
Enlighten us all please.
Jared

#68

Realism

#69

I don’t give a fig if larp has head shots or not. I really don’t. But I do enjoy a good argument as much as the next person. :smiley:

The fact that head shots are ruled out by default in most (all?) larp games is certainly worth discussing.

In the SCA we allow head shots. But, get this, we don’t allow shots below the wrist and shots on the knee or below. Because they’re too dangerous! Head = fine, groin = fine, throat = fine.

Banning head shots is a bit like banning sprinting. Sprinting is dangerous, especially at night on broken ground. Someone could run into someone in the dark really hard or break a leg. Not to mention the cardiovascular risk for people not in peek physical shape! It also gives an unfair advantage to people who can run fast. They can literally run away from people and they may not have purchased the “run away” skill.

Actually, one thing worth considering in this whole debate. The boffer weapons I saw in Hamilton were constructed in much the same way as a kosh/blackjack/sap. They seemed to have an iron bar in the center wrapped in heavy foam tightly wrapped in years of heavy tape. They hit like a padded brick. The newer latex weapons probably only have about 1/3 the mass of one of these dinosaurs (maybe less). If I was using the boffers in Hamilton, I wouldn’t want to do head shots - it would be too dangerous.

#70

Realism is good,I see the argument. Realism has a cost. Such as not being realistic. Headshots will have unrealistic limitations on them. Then again larp will always have intrinsic problems with realism.
What other questions need to be asked to make a larp combat or larp in general realistic enough to make everyone happy?
Interesting observation of the boffers Derek.
They are foam lagging over PVC pipe. We have a few rare examples which are weighted in the handle for balance but they are generally personal weapons or at least once were. They are a little antiquated but also really really cheap and easy to make.
Quest is looking at upgrading to another cheap easy to make weapon type but lack of money & weapon makers make this a slow process.
Boffers are indeed much heavier than a latex version but have a high striking surface area which spreads impact & travel much slower when used safely.
Regardless of this they would indeed be unsuitable for use in a game that allowed head shots.
The padded tip also allows thrusting which is a nice realistic advantage.
They are unpleasant to be hit in the head with to be sure but this happens when people mis-hit, lose control or the target ends up in the wrong place at the wrong time. This happens relatively rarely thankfully.
This will happen regardless of latex or boffer type.
Jared

#71

[color=darkred]I don’t believe you can design a larp combat system that would make everyone happy. Simple really.[/color]

Okay, you’ve lost me there…

Currently, the unrealistic limitation being placed on headshots is that you are not allowed to hit the head. Skirmish has the unrealistic limitation that if you get hit in the head you HEAL 1 HP. This is actually a cool rule because it lets people go a bit harder and when you do smack someone in the head they get over it pretty quickly :smiley:

I actually prefer a sword that’s a bit blade heavy. Sticking a heavy pommel on it does nothing for me. The reason the boffers hit hard is they have a lot of mass. Padding will only do so much. The best way to make a weapon hit softly is to make it light. A 40mm balsa dowel for example would hit just fine without padding.

I don’t know if there are sail makers in Hamilton (seeing as you’re inland) but I used to get lots of fibreglass sail battens from sail makers. I’d take a six-pack in on a Friday afternoon and swap it for a pile of offcuts. The guys used to look forward to me coming in summer because the place they worked was a tin shed with no air conditioning… :smiley:

Farming shops sell fibreglass cattle prods and electric fence battens reasonably cheaply (and I know you have farming supply stores in Hamilton).

The difference in surface area between the boffers and latex weapons isn’t what makes the difference. It’s the heavy plastic and heavy pipe lagging.

It does. A similarly safe thrusting tip can be make by putting a piece of garden hose on the end of the fibreglass rod.

#72

I’m sold off boffers Derek. They’re ugly. But they served a purpose, they still will until Quest gets something better.
However I believe their safety is not an inherent quality but rather depends on who is weilding them and how. If you are aware of the flaws of a given item you can work around them. Trust me if I had the time energy and resource boffers would be gone.

Jared

#73

I think your argument is leaning to much on the lynch-pin of “more attendees = better game”. While it helps, fantasy games don’t strictly have to have more than, say, thirty people involved all up, and I’m sure whoever was writing the game would compensate for this. It wouldn’t be about bringing in throngs of people and making money.

Not to mention Ryan has already repeated countless times that large-scale UK games have successfully run with light head shot rules.

#74

If the most important thing to you is the number of participants, give up larping and play touch rugby.

The fact that 50% of the people polled on diatribe wouldn’t play a game with head shots isn’t a good reason not to run a game with head shots. 75% are probably not interested in playing a wife swapping larp and yet we have games like that :smiling_imp:

I do SCA combat. We have serious armour requirements that are financially beyond many people. You’re looking at around $2000 if you want to purchase all the kit you want off the shelf or about $500 if you’re prepared to put in a few weekends building much of it. This puts off about 90% of the people who are interested in participating. That doesn’t stop us requiring that level of commitment and we’ll still get a good turn out from time to time.

#75

I don’t think the actual number of participants is really the precise issue.
Rather in my mind does larp in NZ want to scare off what few active participants that it does have? Hell if we had 3000 larpers who turned up to larps often it wouldn’t matter if we scared off a few.

From a local perspective, that is in the Tron, specifically Quest, has a base of 20-30 players of which 40-80% turn up regularly (recently anyways).
To lose 1 or 2 of the core group is pretty bad. Any loss is. Especially if its caused for game reasons.
But if Alista predictions for Quest also apply similarly for a lot of combat inclusive larps then losses would be catastrophic. Even 10% is too high.
Still thats not the argument here is it?

Jared

#76

I’d still rather not get hit in the head.

Or the groin, or throat, for that matter.

Partially agree. The other part is the use of self-control.

Now I get lost… Is this thread about headblow or about losing players? I will say that it’s my personal preference (emphasis on personal here) not to play a larp with headblow in it. But if anyone else wants to play that way I’m not gonna stop 'em

p.s. [quote=“Mike Curtis”]So, if light headshots are allowed, then x% of will travel at bodyshot speed and y% will travel at headshot speed (i.e. lower speed), where x + y = 100[/quote]

Don’t take this for granted. Anyone can be an idiot (yes, even me), when under pressure.

The only advantage I see to head shots is the combatants have less to think about during combat.

#77

Don’t take this for granted. Anyone can be an idiot (yes, even me), when under pressure.

The only advantage I see to head shots is the combatants have less to think about during combat.[/quote]
This is whole point: if you intend to strike someone in the head, then you will likely make a lighter strike than if you were hitting their leg. Ergo, more lighter strikes overall.

Sure, you can be an idiot and strike too hard, but that’s an objective risk in all larp combat systems.

I would expect a system that allowed headshots to take a very serious attitude when it comes to dealing with participants who make hard headshots.

One thing that hasn’t come up in this discussion is the use of swung weapons. For example, a larp axe has all the weight on the end of the handle. In order to land a blow, the wielder must swing the axe very quickly. Basically, there is a mass on the end of a rod and the force is significant when it strikes the target.

Allowing untrained / uncontrolled players to use a swung weapon is reasonably dangerous as-is. Allowing them to make headshots could lead to concussion.

So, any headshot allowance could be tempered by not allowing swung weapons to be used for headshots.

#78

Mass weapons used in head blow fighting YUCK!!!

I would seriously consider head blow fighting with swords or light non mass impact weapons only, some of the larger Larp weapons some people make could do Major Damage.

in the first Mordavia game I saw Patch take a head shot from an axe that quite literally nearly took his head of, it is so much harder to control heavier weapons than it is to control swords, so if we do this i would suggest that no mass impact weapons of over a meter in total length be allowed to make head shots.

#79

Doesn’t excluding some weapon types detract from the desired effect of this whole thread? That being realism?

Jared

#80

[quote=“Derek”]
Actually, one thing worth considering in this whole debate. The boffer weapons I saw in Hamilton were constructed in much the same way as a kosh/blackjack/sap. They seemed to have an iron bar in the center wrapped in heavy foam tightly wrapped in years of heavy tape. They hit like a padded brick. The newer latex weapons probably only have about 1/3 the mass of one of these dinosaurs (maybe less). If I was using the boffers in Hamilton, I wouldn’t want to do head shots - it would be too dangerous.[/quote]

Sorry guys, Slightly off topic here, but I had to address this comment.

Derek - our weapons as Jared noted are soft foam lagging over PVC pipe. The larger striking surface spreads the impact and reduces the bruise-factor; the pipe flexes on impact as additional anti-bruising. There is only 1 layer of cloth/duct tape on the blades and since we allow thrusting the tips are replaced annually.

I have been making flats for 10 years now. Back when we had regular player meetings our player base voted overwhelmingly to stick with pvc based weapons, since we found that people tended to hit harder with the flats because they are so light. We do allow people to play with their own flat weapons subject to inspection. We have also had succesful LRP staves, spears, halberds flails ribbed maces, clubs, hammers and mauls.

The points I am making here are as follows:

  • After play-testing flats, our players voted overwhelmingly that pvc-based weapons are safer. I have had wicked bruises for people using flats, but not the round PVC weapons.
  • The construction method allows for safer thrusting tips.
  • They are relatively cheap to make and maintain - I still have the first sword I ever made in early 1992, Because I have stored it well It still has the original foam despite having been through several wet caves!
  • The extra weight tends to slow the swings down, meaning that you don’t see the ‘wanking’ seen so often with lighter weight flat weapons (sorry mod, this is a technical term we have used for years mean rapid little taps without drawing the weapon back for a realistic blow - an illegal technique).
  • At a workshop you can get people to construct their own weapon in less than 30 minutes and they can be used immediately :smiley:

PVC weapons are great for a start-up LRP with not much money. I will however conceed the point that they generally don’t look as pretty as flats.