Rules

Community Larp discussion
#21

The words “lightning” and “immersive” really don’t belong in the same sentence.

The Sith choke grip where you make a choking gesture with your hand and the target acts like they’re choking? That’s pretty immersive, because what appears to be happening OOC is very closely mapped to what’s actually happening IC. Or at least, just as immersive as being hit with a foam sword and pretending it cuts you. Likewise, the torturing glove thing sounds pretty immersive too… depending on what verbal is required, if any.

Lightning, fireballs, etc… what’s happening OOC looks nothing like what it’s supposed to represent IC. So for people who care about that, it’s counter-immersive. And for what? To deliver ranged damage, just like an arrow or throwing dagger (but slightly more damaging). So they’re also functionally redundant, just an alternative to foam weapons. My thought is, make supernatural abilities do something you can’t do with combat, that looks OOC roughly like it does IC. I think the glove of pain is a decent example of that… although personally I wouldn’t design an ability that results in people being having to roleplay pain a lot. Many people tend to be resistant to doing that, and it can generate IC/OOC confusion (are they really in pain or roleplaying?)

Again - this is just a perspective, not a suggestion.

EDIT: Woah, I just had a massive attack of deja vu. Nicki & Phillip, this is honestly not intended as criticism. Like I said before, you guys have been around and heard these discussions before and will have your own perspectives on it, and I’m sure you took it all into account in your design. I’m just engaging to explain a perspective, not to push for anything.

#22

[quote=“amphigori”]
I think that you do need to call out ‘double’ for every strike in mass-combat. If someone is being hit by multiple people, and some of those blows do double-damage as is represented by a call they’ll need to know that, won’t they?[/quote]

Sad but true. The reality of fantasy larp is that if you want fantasy effects, at some stage a call will be needed (and usually for clarity) but sadly even “I strike thee with might blows” becomes as repititive as “mighty blow” when used over and over.

On the lightning bolt front… would it be useful to perhaps jazz up the spell packet at least? Make it shiney blue with a nice blue tail of shiney material?

#23

[Totally unsafe and should never ever be done because a responsible adult should not be supervising but rather running as far as they can if they ever observed this]

Immersive Lightning: Take one roman candle …

[/Totally unsafe and should never ever be done because a responsible adult should not be supervising but rather running as far as they can if they ever observed this]

#24

On a more serious note …

spell packets with streamers would look seriously cool, and considerably aid in spell identification if the streamers were colour-coded (and probably make the ballistics slightly ‘nicer’ as well). The streamer could simply be tucked into the rubber band that’s holding the spell packet closed. The only risk would be getting the streamers tangled around your legs, so maybe shorter would be better (say 20-30cm).

#25

[quote=“Ignifluous”]On a more serious note …

spell packets with streamers would look seriously cool, and considerably aid in spell identification if the streamers were colour-coded (and probably make the ballistics slightly ‘nicer’ as well). The streamer could simply be tucked into the rubber band that’s holding the spell packet closed. The only risk would be getting the streamers tangled around your legs, so maybe shorter would be better (say 20-30cm).[/quote]

Naked balloons don’t make the best spell packets. But cloth covered ones do…

#26

In Skirmish, we used packets with streamers, mainly to assist in locating them after a battle. The tails tend to break, so it works best if having a tail is a nice-to-have rather than mandatory.

In Multiverse, we have sunglobes - represented by golden packets - which are IC items and represent searingly hot globes. They do mundane damage, only if they strike you one the body or limb (not shield/weapons).

On the Lightning Bolt thing, it works as long as the packet is IC and creates a point-to-point connection with the mage which allows the electricity to flow to the target. i.e. the packet is real, but the electricity is imagined; like a lot of stuff in larp. That’s how it works in Multiverse.

Using the packet as an OOC way of determining whether it hits is not as immersive.

#27

[quote=“Mike Curtis”]On the Lightning Bolt thing, it works as long as the packet is IC and creates a point-to-point connection with the mage which allows the electricity to flow to the target. i.e. the packet is real, but the electricity is imagined; like a lot of stuff in larp. That’s how it works in Multiverse.

Using the packet as an OOC way of determining whether it hits is not as immersive.[/quote]
Fascinating (as always) how such a subtly different point of view can totally change things.

#28

I don’t find spell packets for lightning bolt immersive, regardless of how they’re rationalised. There is no lightning, so why call it lightning? If there must be thrown damage spells, why not call it something else that sounds damaging but isn’t so visually not-existent.

An IC “spell charm” throwing packet for something like a charm spell were no visual effect is “missing” is maybe less jarring… but the packet would actually have to look like something cool, not just a bag of seeds, before it started really adding to the environment rather than detracting.

I could dig a cool-looking projectile prop weapon as somewhat immersive. For example, if the sun globe props were foam balls nicely painted to look metal with electrical or fiery decorations, with a tennis ball or something in the middle to give them enough weight to fly (like the throwing rocks we made for Og!), I could see the argument that they’re no less immersive than foam weapons. In fact, those Og! throwing rocks really added to the sense that we were primitive people fighting with sticks and stones.

(Tangent: talking about that makes me want to run Og! at a Chimera).

#29

I’ve finally had a chance to read through the rules posted up. I was most interested in the skills section. While they seem to cover the necessities of a character that can do something useful - your magic, fighting, armour, healing sort of stuff. Where is the stuff that says what our characters are about, like the sort of skills that everyday villagers would have in crafting or cooking/brewing. And different languages?

Is this something we just make-up ? I can just say my character can cook and sew and sing and tame horse and paint masterpieces and … Is there any limit to what we can say we can do, if its not actually useful, just flavourful? Is there usually rules for this aspect, or is it just conveyed with the roleplaying. So that if the player doesn’t know anything about a skill, then the character probably won’t. Or can I say my character is an acrobatic, but during the game has hurt her back, so can’t do any, (because the player can’t). But could I still recognise others with that skill, or talk about it, beacuse my character knows about it?

I’m thinking this through as I write, and maybe I’m missing a game convention that is obvious to everyone else. But as I looked at the list, as a member of team ornamental/travelling troupe, I don’t see any skills that would fit into our character concepts [or any seamanship skills that would be helpful to the pirates for that matter.]

#30

What result would those skills achieve in the game? Generating an income between games maybe? If there are no rules for getting to A to B in the setting, how would sailing help?

I think there are some local larp conventions in play here:

  • Don’t have rules for stuff that people can actually do
  • Don’t have rules for stuff that doesn’t have a mechanical effect on yourself, other characters, or the setting
  • Make up any abilities you like that don’t relate to the rules, so long as it’s within reason
#31

Okay, so the rules are just to make sure the mechanics are balanced. I appreciate that I’m coming to this from a different background where everything you can do is listed some way or another in the rules, even if its just listed under “artisan skill”.

I think having these skills in game give people incentive to add another dimension to their character. For example a fighter may whittle wooden toys in their spare time, and so if they are in a situation where they can think outside the square to solve a problem using thier background skills, say to carve a token to entertain the daughter of the visiting noblewoman to curry favour, they know they have this skill, and don’t need to break immersion to ask part way through a game “given my background, its it reasonable that I can do this now?”

I guess its always up to the GMs to decide what is reasonable, just depends whether they want to have it defined in the character generation stage, which is what I expected.

#32

Yeah, the downside of only having rules where you absolutely have to is that the only rules tend to be for combat & magic, and that can make people inclined to focus on those. Especially in a setting like this. I don’t think making lots of rules for everything is necessarily a good alternative, but I know what you mean about it being the norm in some tabletop RPGs. As I see it the differences with larp are that you don’t need rules for a lot of things because you can just do them (like singing), and if you had a rule to allow you to do something that some people can actually do but you don’t happen to be able to do (like singing) it might seem silly. Having said that, there are some larps out there with rules for everything, including rules for convincing other characters to do things… instead of roleplaying out convincing them, or actually convincing them.

#33

Actually I think the lack of “supporting” skills is because you rarly see a hero doing anything other than fighting heroicly and training to fight heroicly. Teonn (from what muppet has splatterd in my direction abscentmidedly) is supposed to be about the main characters in an epic fantasy adventure book. You rarly see Drizzt sewing a new smock except in the prelude.

#34

If that were true then fantasy tabletop RPGs wouldn’t have those skills either. But many do.

I think the other factors with larp are that there’s pressure to minimise the number of rules, because you have to store them in your head, you can’t look them up in a big rulebook. There’s also pressure to minimise the number of rules that require a GM to facilitate, because (unlike in tabletop RPGs) there often isn’t a GM around. Also, larps tend to be more constantly in-character and played out in real-time so it’s more disruptive to break character to sort out some minor rule, whereas in tabletop a lot of the time the players are talking out of character anyway, and play is seldom in real-time.

#35

I think in larp it’s very difficult to find a use for skills like that, and since XP is much more limited in larp, people tend to want to use the skills they’ve spent XP on.

(In Wolfgang we ended up with the catch-all skill of Lore: [Insert Here]. It was a 2CP skill where you could pretty much put anything there. People made pretty liberal use of it in rounding out their characters with interesting skills.)

#36

Just a suggestion for lightning bolt:

Cans of Silly String

#37

[quote=“Ryan Paddy”]If that were true then fantasy tabletop RPGs wouldn’t have those skills either. But many do.

I think the other factors with larp are that there’s pressure to minimise the number of rules, because you have to store them in your head, you can’t look them up in a big rulebook. There’s also pressure to minimise the number of rules that require a GM to facilitate, because (unlike in tabletop RPGs) there often isn’t a GM around. Also, larps tend to be more constantly in-character and played out in real-time so it’s more disruptive to break character to sort out some minor rule, whereas in tabletop a lot of the time the players are talking out of character anyway, and play is seldom in real-time.[/quote]

Ahh, I guess we have different ideas of a “rule”. I wasn’t implying a “this is the way this skill will work in game” type of rule, merely as part of the character creation aspect of the rules, (and later-on this would include the spending xp to learn new stuff).

I have been thinking that with only having the “weapons and magic” as things people can spend their xp on, that this creates a bias that these are the only things that are worth having in the game, and the only thing needed in the game. That this game is in effect just a dungeon bash, and that you don’t need to have a more than one dimensional character, that this is not a “real world” where the characters need skills to survive. They just need to combat opponents.

Also it also disadvantages the specialists and creates generalists. In my experience the reason for generalist to adventure in group become less realistic. Why do we need specific guards if everyone can fight? Why do we have specialist mages if everyone can learn spells. And because there is nothing else to spend xp on, why wouldn’t every one have spent their xp on this useful stuff? For example should the sailors be able to fight as well as specilist guards, or should they have to spend some xp on rope work and dice games as behooves their background?

Perhaps with Wolfgangs still being reasonably fresh, it is hard to avoid comparisons, which is not necessairly fair to Teonn, but I don’t see how a character such as Lady Blanche or Orlandus could be created in this system. And it is with these non-combatent charcters around, that the guard-types have a reason to be there, to protect the others.

Sorry, this is getting a bit more philisophical that straight critique of these rules.

My suggestion would to be include a list of artisan or background skills, that will add flavour to the charater creation (which I can send something similiar to from other game system). Have these skills listed as a nominal 1xp or 2xp or get 3 for free or whatever balances with the other skills. And they don’t have to be explained as this is how they work in the game, and can be roleplayed out as usual, just gets people thinking about it.

#38

The man behind Orlandus has personally assured me he is busily constructing an even more ‘useless’ character … something about keeping the memory of Team Oranamental alive …

#39

The man behind Orlandus has personally assured me he is busily constructing an even more ‘useless’ character … something about keeping the memory of Team Oranamental alive …[/quote]
This I have got to see. I might just have to try and add something in my history so I can have a go at him. If he wears tights again it’ll be interesting…

#40

While this does ring true, I’d counter that the essence of LARP is to play a character that is not you. The simplicity of leaving it at the level of “your character can do whatever you can do” certainly has it’s place, but in the interests of “being” your character, it would be fair to say that there would be things you can do that they can’t (like reading and writing?), and vice versa (magic, tracking, knowledge of certain IC elements, treating an injured person…). Personally, I’m perfectly happy for a few rules around stuff that most people can’t do, and even for sensible rules that allow their character to do something that maybe they themselves can’t (to this day I wish I could brew invisibility potions :stuck_out_tongue: ). It’s all part of creating a new entity that isn’t me to play make-believe with. At the same time, I do agree that going so far as to have rules that dictate social interactions like convincing people from x to y is unnecessary, because RPing that sort of thing is part of the point of it all as well, part of playing your character.

(Backtracking) As for the whole breaking immersion thing… well, we’re playing make-believe, right? While I’m not fond of spell packets myself, they can present a useful mechanic, giving people something to react to more than anything. For a fantasy game like Teonn, where people have such imaginable powers as being able to conjure lightning at each other, such things could be necessary and I find it odd that such a minute detail as a spell packet, in the midst of a heated combat or RP scenario, could really jar anyone’s already well-practiced ability to maintain their own suspension of disbelief - especially when the well lit, white-washed scout scout barracks is supposed to be a dark and horrible dungeon. Calls are a bit the same I guess, too many of them will make it feel less like the scenario and more like a bunch of geeks running around a park, but a few well placed ones can also achieve some great effects and help simulate those make-believe abilities that characters have, but we don’t. Like before I think the real challenge for any game writer lies in striking that balance that works for them, and any system that approaches “double-through-poison” levels probably isn’t going to get my vote either.

That said, there was certainly a charm to the earlier SWVH games where there were so few calls, and I like the idea of a LARP where whatever abilities can be bought are about the more skilful things like brewing potions and divining from the stars, rather than doing rock-paper-scissors to throw a car at someone, or belowing loudly to make them thing their being hit in some fancy way. It’s certainly food for thought…

Back to the now - thanks Muppet for all the answers :smiley: