Minimum aethetic standards in games

are you for or against minimum aethetic standards for costumes/props in games?

  • i would have them and here is why…
  • i would not have them and here is why…

0 voters

Are you for or against minimum aethetic standards for costumes/props in games?

ie. GM states what are the Minimum aethetic standards for that game, specifically what is the minimum expected (a plain black robe and plain black shoes), and is not strictly not allowed (blue jeans)

inforced by the PC not meeting minimum standards being asked to leave.

Sure. Higher costume standards boost immersion and can help realise the GM’s artistic vision for the game. Minimum costume standards may not be the best tool to achieve that (creating a positive costume culture and helping people out is better IMHO), but if GMs want to, and advertise up front what they expect, then the market will decide.

Coming in to larping with no idea on what the standards I was supposed to meet, no idea whether fantasy meant medieval garb or game like garb, not having very much money and not wanting to potentially commit, I would disagree with this idea unless the GMing team is ready to provide extra costume that they consider acceptable for new players, or even players who ask for aid considering a particular financial situation.

It would be good to get the aesthetic standard up, but not at the cost of ruining games by being costume nazis.

Games are only “ruined” by this if it causes them to fail to get enough players (which is the market deciding). Some players being excluded from the potential player pool isn’t actually a problem from a GM’s POV, unless it shrinks it so far that the game is unviable (see above).

I read the question as whether you’d support minimum standards in SOME games, with those standards being clearly defined for the benefit of new players. It’s up to GMs what if any standard they encourage or enforce. In which case I’d say “obviously.”

You’re such a free-market ideologue, Idiot. :wink:

On the other hand I think it’s also good for the community to have at least some big games that encourage but don’t enforce high standards to make them accessible to new players or those low on resources.

Not everyone can sew or has access to good costume gear, especially if its their first game…this may already exist, but would a pool of communal gear be a good idea…simple pants, belts, tunics, capes etc for new players to help cover any gaps in their costumes? I certainly have a pile of old kit I’d be happy to donate if there was a need for such a thing.

I’m all for providing people with information and support. And generally there is a high degree of people sharing kit around before games, anyway.

But I am curious - what’s the appetite among players for games that are deliberately high end in costuming standards? Like maybe a boutique historical game that expects people to make an effort on getting the details right?

I’m all for costume guidelines, but I don’t believe a minimum standard would be enforced, so I think it’d be a mistake to word it that way. I also know that for new people coming in, that the idea of a minimum standard is a real barrier to entry.

There are already people who give their spare time to help new players get across that somewhat fuzzy imaginary line.

[quote=“Derek”]I’m all for costume guidelines, but I don’t believe a minimum standard would be enforced, so I think it’d be a mistake to word it that way. I also know that for new people coming in, that the idea of a minimum standard is a real barrier to entry.

There are already people who give their spare time to help new players get across that somewhat fuzzy imaginary line.[/quote]

Exactly my thoughts.

Its a long-standing KapCon slogan about games and choice. But if you want it in less political language, people will vote with their feet, and (smart) GMs will pay attention to that.

Absolutely. But there’s a good variety of games, and space for all sorts.

HanSagan: there are already regional gear pools, and GMs imposing costume requirements would be smart to enable players to borrow from them.

Was just poking fun, letting the market decide is the same way I describe it.

GMs get to run whatever they want and set expectations as they see fit. Players get to decide whether to eat what the GM is cooking. If a player doesn’t like some fixed policy or approach a game has, they should find another one rather than disrupting that game by ignoring the GMs’ expectations.

But as Derek points out, it pays for GMs to be careful of how they approach this. They have the right to say “you must meet X costuming standard to play,” but don’t be surprised if it rankles with some people, including some of those who agree to the conditions in order to access the game, and that may affect the atmosphere in the game and the community. In my opinion it would be better if games with those policies are the exception rather than the norm, and tend to be smaller games. Guidelines feel friendlier than restrictions, so they’re less likely to cause bad feeling.

I think giving players some guidelines is a good idea - like:

This is a game set in A setting. Ideal costuming would involve B, passable costume would be C, GMs can assist with some basic gear in a pinch, so please contact us if you’re having difficulties. We want you to have a good time!

Incidentally, have any GMs been pleased/surprised at high costuming or, alternatively, found their carefully written costume guide ignored?

I think this is good if (as others have said) it is stated an encouraging way, rather than clear-cut had and fast rule. I still think a list of things to avoid (if you can) is really useful for new players, e.g. no brightly coloured sneakers, and even including some helpful suggestions like winding used material round shoes to make them look more coolthentic. I think the tone matters as much as the message when stating these things in whether or not you will put off players.

Having had a few discussions with US larpers and Euro larpers and Dave in the UK, the emphasis seems to be on what you should not wear.

Some UK and Euro larps do in fact have strict costume requirements that if you don’t meet them, you won’t be able to play. For those larps I am not sure this is a barrier, they are not entry level and they communicate the requirements clearly. This is down to the larp culture in each place, with sizeable larping communities in each and there appears to be games to suit most peoples needs. For example, the original Witch House brief was pitched at experienced mature larpers and had clear expectations on the players.
So in this way, this larp was exclusionist but does not impact on games available at entry level.

The US is slightly different in that they have quite a spectrum in requirements. They have hundreds of games and systems. Some of them barely fit what I would call larp, they are sometimes more like live combat games where the act of combat is more important than anything else. Quality of costume is often reduced to the extra combat advantage it gives you. So in this instance you can expect to see home made that roughly portrays the armour type worn over jeans and a t shirt.
That been said there are a number of US larps which more closely resemble overseas larps in terms of costume quality but even so you will still see the odd player wearing a tabard over camo cargo and sneakers. Boffers are still common over in the US and while some larps encourage foam latex weapons there is a big perception that they are not as safe as boffers. Also there is an evolution of boffers which are ultra light flat boffers i.e. camp mat over fibreglass rod which in my mind are close to foam latex except they have thrusting tips in their construction. They also have “plastidip weapons” which are kind of like a foam latex weapon except they use a durable plastic coating.

And the US also has a small number of larps which are modeled nordic larps called “turku” larps which are intended to be fully immersive and full contact, typically using calimacil or similar injected molded weapons. These larps have strict requirements but usually allow for new players to attend a couple of events before they are expected to meet the high requirements.

So are we doing it right? I think so. We have guidelines and frequently new larpers enter games as crew or via Chimera or the likes. Because we are a small community which seems to be well networked, we also have the advantage of being able to help new larpers out. We have a large number of people ready to help out with costume lending or advice.

Stay with guidelines and push the community link. We’re lucky to have quite a unique larp community here in that we can support one another!

Having trawled through a lot of larp photo sites recently, you’d be surprised how many Swedish fantasy larpers wear cargo pants and modern shirts - and how much it doesn’t matter if combined with the right other kit (e.g. being largely hidden by a surcoat or war-skirt).

Having trawled through a lot of larp photo sites recently, you’d be surprised how many Swedish fantasy larpers wear cargo pants and modern shirts - and how much it doesn’t matter if combined with the right other kit (e.g. being largely hidden by a surcoat or war-skirt).[/quote]

Certainly. And there is a perception that Euro larps are one way and UK larps are another but in reality there is a spectrum in any country. What is a bit different is where the average level sits.

Games are only “ruined” by this if it causes them to fail to get enough players (which is the market deciding). Some players being excluded from the potential player pool isn’t actually a problem from a GM’s POV, unless it shrinks it so far that the game is unviable (see above).[/quote]

I’m not talking ruining the games for the GM, I’m talking ruining the games for individuals. I don’t think we should have an attitude of “Meh? My standard is up to scratch so I don’t really care if people are being declined because they can’t afford to get theirs up to scratch”.

That’s a very odd choice of terminology, and I’m very sorry I’m “ruining” games for you by running them in Wellington, or running them up against something else you like at Chimera, or running only 20-player games, or running games with themes you may not like.

The fact of the matter is that not everyone gets to play every game. But there’ll be another one along soon enough. And if you desperately, desperately, have to play a particular game or you will die!!11!!!, but it has kit standards, then you should probably ask your friends or the GM for help meeting them. People have already made it clear that they’d want GMs to assist players to meet any minimum standards, and I think that’s a good idea.

But at the end of the day, I support the right of GMs to run whatever they want, and set whatever standards they want. If they want to run a game with deeper immersion though better costume, great! If they want to run “Hamlet” in the original Klingon, fantastic! If they want to run “Mad About the Boy” (a Nordic larp in which all the characters are women), then that’s cool too. The more the merrier, and it all advances the art.

That’s a very odd choice of terminology, and I’m very sorry I’m “ruining” games for by running them in Wellington, or running them up against something else you like at Chimera, or running only 20-player games, or running games with themes you may not like.

The fact of the matter is that not everyone gets to play every game. But there’ll be another one along soon enough. And if you desperately, desperately, have to play a particular game or you will die!!11!!!, but it has kit standards, then you should probably ask your friends or the GM for help meeting them. People have already made it clear that they’d want GMs to assist players to meet any minimum standards, and I think that’s a good idea.

But at the end of the day, I support the right of GMs to run whatever they want, and set whatever standards they want. If they want to run a game with deeper immersion though better costume, great! If they want to run “Hamlet” in the original Klingon, fantastic! If they want to run “Mad About the Boy” (a Nordic larp in which all the characters are women), then that’s cool too. The more the merrier, and it all advances the art.[/quote]

I concurr, Idiot. While it is the GMs responsibility to make sure the players in their game have a good time, they can decide on the game they pitch and their standards. Its not their responsibility to please every potential player, just to make the pitch accurate so that the player who do sign up know what to expect.