[quote=“SlackerJ”]That’s an idea. Why did no one think of a Care Bears LARP sooner? Could attract the young people…[/quote]And/or the furries. In costume.
[quote=“Wulfen (David)”][quote]The game was a bit lethargic in the first half, and it wasn’t until in the second half when the conflict ramped up that it acquired some energy and widespread drama.
[/quote]
Not so, there was a hell of a lot going on under the surface, many of us at that game were experienced masquerade players and used the subtlety we learned from that game to get a lot of plot moving without making it obvious.[/quote]
I think mileage would probably vary on that. Some players found or made plenty to do, others would have benefitted from a more obvious drama to interact with from earlier.
I don’t think this was the combat system of the game though. I would look at the characters and their goals/personalities. With good goals that maintain social interaction throughout the game you can help those players along with something they may not be accustomed to.
I don’t think this was the combat system of the game though. I would look at the characters and their goals/personalities. With good goals that maintain social interaction throughout the game you can help those players along with something they may not be accustomed to.[/quote]I played Bela Lugosi, and I had very little to do the whole game. However, I’m not a social person, and I was also very tired by the time I was playing at Chimera last year, so that didn’t help. I was never going to be able to go find myself plots to get involved in.
Also, I think the two plots the character is supposed to be heavily involved in, didn’t really happen for him. One was a radio play version of Star Wars that the GMs decided they wouldn’t do that day - but the reasons they gave were pretty good, so I’m not holding it against them or anything. The other plot I think the character was supposed to be heavily involved in, the vampire plot, I was accidentally blocked out of right at the start of the game.
I don’t think this was the combat system of the game though.[/quote]
Neither. I was just trying to say that Hindenburg could have also worked well as more action-heavy, as a way of giving an example of how pregen scenarios aren’t necessarily action-light. I think in that case the GM briefing would have made more difference than the system in terms of encouraging/discouraging action, although it’s also true that the character sheets would have made the most difference of all. But the main point of the “attackers wins on draw” idea is to speed up RPS, with encouraging conflict being secondary.
Certainly not criticising anyone in terms of Hindenburg, I thought it went very well.
Not all conflict has to be physical. And the mechanics are just a tool to encourage the sorts of conflict the designer wants to see in the game.
Okay, but only if I can play Beastly, Wizard No Heart’s bumbling apprentice 
Yeah. In most cases, conflict creates the most interesting interactions. And personally, I prefer larps with a lot of interesting interactions that create an unstable environment where player actions can have big results. So in most cases, encouraging conflict (whether combat or other sorts) is probably a good thing in mechanics.
For a larp that really isn’t about combat, I wouldn’t have any combat rules. Roleplaying tends to emphasise combat because the genres are often action-oriented, but there are lots of genres where it’s irrelevant. Like a model United Nations or something - there’s certainly combat happening out there in the countries being discussed, but within the UN itself it’s all about diplomatic “conflict”. And sure, there would be some larpers who wouldn’t be interested in such non-violent genres, but that doesn’t invalidate those genres- it’s just a personal preference.
Cameron Burns tried a run a UN LARP at Battlecry this year, that was first run at Battlecry 2003 (I think). He ended up not getting enough people for it, so it was run for the newbies to AMERICA a few weeks after the start of the first semester.
The crossover between people who like to play miniature fantasy war games and people who like to roleplay modern diplomats is not so great as might be thought.
I wouldn’t want to play a UN game myself for that matter. It was just an example of a low-combat larp.
[quote=“Ryan Paddy”]The crossover between people who like to play miniature fantasy war games and people who like to roleplay modern diplomats is not so great as might be thought.
I wouldn’t want to play a UN game myself for that matter. It was just an example of a low-combat larp.[/quote]
The game wasn’t targeted at the wargammers, it was targeted at the roleplayers and particularly larpers at the event in mind, We had more than enough people for it.
The real problem was that due to communications issues SOMEONE running a particular larp on the first day snaggled my spot that he thought was free (to run a part 2 to their game) and then sent the the LARPing players home…meaning the issue couldn’t be cleared up. I nicely decided to let them run their game and not stamp my feet and throw a tatrum 
The game did eventualy get run (twice if you inclued the first time it ran), so the numbers of interested people are there.