Does anybody here remember what the distinction between Live Role Play and Live Action Role Play is anymore? I notice people have stopped calling it Lurp and now call it Larp.
Larp sounds prettier 
Does “action” have something to do with fighting and other active stuff like that? That’s what I would think.
But maybe it’s just two different name for the same thing.
There is no differance at all…its just that the term LARP is used alot…may have something to do with the fact that in the MET (thats vampire) its called Live Action Roleplaying (i know the irony that it has less action than alot of other LARPs)
Yeah, there’s no difference.
The “action” in LARP doesn’t mean violence. The phrase “live-action” is borrowed from the movies, where it means that actors are used to physically play characters, as opposed to “animation” where characters are drawn. The parallel is that in tabletop characters are imagined, whereas in larp they are physically played.
LRP is still used in the UK by most groups, but LARP is slowly gaining ground there.
In most other places around the world LARP has won a largely-bloodless victory. Dunno why exactly, maybe because it looks easier to pronounce or because WW used it in Vampire. I use larp because it’s better-recognised internationally, no other reason.
In French-speaking countries it’s called En Grandeur Nature which means “at full scale”. In some Nordic countries its called Laiv, which just means live.
I remember back in the late 80’s / eary 90’s when we were playing, with big clunky wooden swords, it as called Widegaming.
Yeah, we called it widegaming when I started running games at high school in the 1990’s.
Got that from Derek, I think.
I reckon the language is not well set up to talk about what we’re aiming for any more. Obviously it comes largely from the table top scene and differentiates itself from RPG with “LA”. But now (as you can see) half of us don’t even know who the creator of DnD was.
With our push for immersion and simulation I think the “larp” term gets increasingly less relevant. But I haven’t got a better one…
My games are very “ARG” style, but I don’t like that name either. I don’t like acronym names much 'cos they’re geeky. I don’t even like the “game” word because it has a sporty kind of feeling where there are winners and losers…
In Hamilton we have always considered LRP as game where you essentially do the things that your characters does. LARP is a game where you say you do somethingand then use a Out of Game Mechanism to determine a result.
For Example, you are walking through a setting and meet a vampire coming the other way. You decide to run away.
In a LRP, you grab the money and run.
In LARP you say “I am running way”, then you both play paper/scissor/rock.
In Hamilton we had a LARP split off the LRP but we still believe in doing rather than saying we do. LRP predates LARP in New Zealand by at least 5 years.
In future we might just call ourselves fantasy recreation. When we ring the police and various people and say what we are doing, that is what we tell them.
That’s a pretty rare way of defining the terms these days. I’ve only seen anyone define them that way in the UK. Everywhere else in the world, and to most UK players, they’re interchangable.
Many things in language have become interchangable, it doesn’t mean they are right. Terms are originally created for a purpose to define something. Other people will often try and change a word for their own uses. Management are the worst offender, with the press and politicians second and third.
The distinction there doesn’t make any sense, so I declare it void.
Man, I think the sooner we get away from the relationship to tabletop roleplaying the better. It bugs me hugely that on that same Wikipedia article on larp there’s a picture of dice at the top. Why? Because it’s part of the roleplaying series. AUGH!
Nero uses dice
I wasn’t aware of that. I know NERO uses live combat for the fighting aspect, and I thought they used uses-per-day effects or spell points for most other things.
But there are larps that use dice. Rules to Live By definitely uses dice: interactivitiesink.com
In terms of LRP vs LARP, I don’t think they were originally created to refer to different things. I think they were created by different people to refer to roughly the same thing. But in any case, they’re used interchangably by most people now. And for that matter LRP is only used much in the UK.
The whole issue of what is a LARP/LRP and how they can be categorised into types is very contentious. I would say there isn’t a lot of agreement on it internationally. I have some pretty firm views on it (that are very inclusive) but I don’t consider my point of view definitive as it’s widely disagreed with. Check out this discussion with a larper from the USA for example: What is larp?
Likewise, most of the terms within larp aren’t set in stone. I’ve heard “abstract resolution” used a lot, but then in that Wikipedia article the term “symbolic combat” is used. Personally I’m not that keen on the way combat specifically is used to define types of larp. I think it’s just as relevant whether you are expected to really hide/bluff/run or whether a mechanic is used for it.
Nero seems to use dice in their Formal Magic System to see if a spell works UGH!
Me persoonally think it makes a huge difference if a game is ‘live’ combat and ‘symbolic’ combat. You tend to hold them in different venues for a start. You need different equipment, you end up with different players. I pesonally feel if I wanted symbolic combat I can stay at home and play D&D. It is about as energetic.
[quote="Alista"Me persoonally think it makes a huge difference if a game is ‘live’ combat and ‘symbolic’ combat. You tend to hold them in different venues for a start. You need different equipment, you end up with different players. I pesonally feel if I wanted symbolic combat I can stay at home and play D&D. It is about as energetic.[/quote]
I think it’s a matter of taste.
Even with symbolic/abstract resolution it’s still very different to tabletop. You’are actually walking around as your character, inhabiting space relative to the other characters in a way that parallels the real world, and doing most things in real time. Leaving aside how resolution is managed, there’s a lot of appeal in the “larpers do it standing up” approach that’s not about how energetic the play is. The appeal is in inhabiting your character.
I also don’t think there’s anything like a clean line between live-resolution larps and symbolic-resolution larps. All larps contain aspects of both, and it’s a question of degree. Walking around is always live, and magic is always symbolic to the extent that you’re not actually casting a spell. Even live combat has an aspect of symbolism to it.
There is a very clear line between Live Role Play systems and symbolic interection systems.
In classic Live Role You actually perform the actions and therefore the outcomes of those actions are the results you yourself have achieved. To win a fight you have to hit them more often than they have hit points. If a person throws a spell at you and you physically duck the spell ball then you make the saving throw.
In symbolic action you use a random event generator to determine the outcomes of your actions. Instead of hitting some one with a sword, you put in traits or whatever, then go paper/scissors/rock. You could equally throw a pair of dice and the highest wins. Same difference.
Live Role Play is about doing, a LARP like Masquerade is about saying you are doing, just like a paper role play.
An example could be a cave module we did a few years ago. A wight attacked the party. He waited until half the party had past and leapt down into there midst. He then attacked them for about thirty seconds and ran away without having been hit once by four people. In a LARP the party would see the player approach, the wight would then say I am attacking you, the party then has a quick conference to see who is at the front and defending and tend to mash the wight in very short time. The difference is one relies on the skill of the players involved, the other uses random number generation. HUGE Difference.
Oh this comment angers me…“There is a very clear line between Live Role Play systems and symbolic interection systems” so your saying Simulated Combat games - such as Minds Eye Theatre - arn’t LARPs (or LRPs or which ever you want to call it)?
Get Over It
A Sim’ Combat LARP is still a LARP…you can be all high and elitist about it all you want, but its still LARP…I hate the Elitism that I have seen about Live Combat LARP vs Sim’ Combat LARP…
Get Over It
Ok so it may not be “live action hitting each other” but the ROLEPLAYING aspect is still live action…
Get Over It
Just because combat is dealt with differantly or magic is dealt with differantly doesn’t preclued a game from being LARP
Get Over It
If your definition of LARP involes the fact that your combat actions outcomes are defined by personal skill…thats a pretty weak deffinition… If a game had NO combat you wouldn’t stop calling it a LARP would you?
Get Over It
What about supernatural powers? We dont have the ability to use overt magical ability in real life (If your a practicing witch I appoligise if I just offended your beliefs) so you’d have to get rid of those as there isn’t a system i can think of you could use to represent that being a function of your own real life abilities…
Get Over It
A Simulated Combat system relies of the abilities of your CHARACTERS not your ability…just like you rely on the knowledge your CHARACTER has not the knowledge you have…All it is is that in Boffer Games is that you assume that your character has the same combat skills you do…
Both types are Still LARP. You take on a persona differant from your own in an enviroment where your goal is to immerse your self in a fictional world using tangable real life interaction with persons representing other characters…Even if your hitting them or not…both are LARPs
Plus I’m also proud of the outcomes of actions I’ve done in Systems that have a “Simulated combat” (or as you call it symbolic) system…but those are the ROLEPLAYING side of the games…the manipulation, socialising and politicing…you know the character interactions that arn’t combat…the actual ROLEPLAYING side of it. Which is where i place the importance of my games, not the combat system…but you know…thats just me…
Definitions for my arguements in this thread from page 1
LRP = a system where you perform your action.
LARP = a symbolic system.
So Masquerade would indeed be a LARP but not a LRP.
To re-emphasise the main point.
In LRP the outcomes of your actions are the direct results of your actions and decisions.
In LARP or ‘Symbolic LRP’ the outcomes of your actions are determined by a random event generator such as a dice or paper/scissors/rock.
This may be a subtle point but is is the same as the difference between ‘Free will’ and ‘Predeterminism’ that philosphers argued about for over 2000 years until finally solved in 1927.
In practice the difference can be seen in a character death. In an LRP it is because you screwed up, in an LARP you can, if you want, blame it on bad luck. This is especially true since they shifted from 1st ed Masquerade.
I am saying they LRP and LARP are different, other people are saying this is elitist. This I find interesting as Boffer Weapon LRP is usually considered the lowest form of Live Role Play. It is looked down upon by wooden weapon groups, by steel weapon groups, by recreation groups and by Symbolic action groups. So if everyone looks down upon Boffer weapon groups why do people still play. Probably because it is the closest that you can get to recreating a fantasy world without paying millions on a virtual reality setup.
If I went to a convention and watched people playing various RPGS and changing from table to table and at the same convention there was a symbolic interaction game on, I would not be able to tell the difference between the two. But when people picked up boffer weapons and went outside it would be obvious there is something different going on.
On further reflection I have decided that ‘Symbolic Action LRP’ probably has more in common with Massive Multiplayer Online Games such as Everquest and World of Warcraft thanPaper Role Play or Live Role Play games like Mordavia, Skirmish or even NERO and Amtgard.
Get real
I doubt that VERY, VERY much.
[quote]In LRP the outcomes of your actions are the direct results of your actions and decisions.
In LARP or ‘Symbolic LRP’ the outcomes of your actions are determined by a random event generator such as a dice or paper/scissors/rock.[/quote]
That is a GROSS simplification, as anyone thats played both types of game to any degree can tell you…
If you want to use your seperation of LARP and LRP as you define it…you may want to redefine the definition to…
In “Boffer LARP” or “Pysical Combat LARP” the outcomes of your actions are the direct results of your actions and decisions as a player.
In “Sim’ Combat LARP” or “Symbolic LARP” the outcomes of some of your actions are determined by a symbolic system representing the abilities of your character.
(you can replace the term LARP with LRP if you wish)
That is a definition that still gets your seperation across, and I’m sure is closer to a difinition we can agree on.
And Besides your so called “LRP” is a “symbolic LRP” anyway… you use boffer weapons, hit points, there’s no rules for bleeding ETC…no matter which you use, its all just systems of rules to represent the abilities of the charatcers you play
And as for your comment of “Get Real”…
I am just pointing out that there is merit to the “Sim’ combat” games(or “symbolic LRP” or LARP games as you call them) and that they should not be discounted so easily as has been done before by so many elitists (which is what i read into your post if im mistaken I apoligise)
They are BOTH (what ever you call the 2 "schools of thought) just SYSTEMS to represent fictional characters…I can appreciate the upsides and downsides of each system (Reality Vs Flexibility ETC)…lets not argue about it or which is “best” or why the other is “wrong” or definitions or anything silly like that…frankly there are better things to do with our time…like work on new games and try to promote the hobby of LARP/LRP to the general public to encourage more involvment
Yeah I wouldn’t use that term either…as an avid ARG player (and NZ’s only PM so far) I can tell you that the term “ARG” would only aply to very particular games…Even live action ARGs (like parts of “Art of the Heist”) wouldn’t be called LARPs as your not playing a role…ARGs and LARP are two related but distinct beasts…try not to brandish it around to loosly 