View on LARP ideals

This is my response to the manifesto/dogma debates.
Little resolution has been seen in those arguments as of yet so this is an attempt to channel those thoughts creatively.

My challenge is this:
Present the concepts necessary to create a LARP system which includes the best ideals from systems which currently exist or could exist as a result of this discussion.
It would need to be capable of coping with a popular fantasy LARP complete with magic, monsters, NPC and PC characters, and their interactions including combat.
I don’t expect detail but am immensely interested concepts and in how they could be adapted to multiple genres.
I am particularly in how systems may be stripped to the barest minimum of rules and still remain effective complete with magic, monsters, NPC and PC characters or even a blurred interface of both, and their interactions including combat.

Edit:If replying to anothers posting please take what you like of their suggestions and build on that rather than the negative points. Feel free to express yourself by ignoring what you don’t agree with.

I have thrown out the Gauntlet!
Respond with your best.
Jared

Ah, synthesism. Good show!

Mine is very short of details, sorry, and is more the attitude I try to bring to a game:

Doesn’t help with building a system to encourage these things, though. :frowning:

I like Catherine’s Manifesto. I’m with her on this.

My Dimes worth; much in the same theme as Catherine, but some concepts are universal.

Use what works in your Game, and dont let anyone tell you that it wont work.

Your game your universe if it works and it is easy to understand, use it.

Have fun, love what you are doing and have faith in your concept.

the rest will work itself out

And before you judge someone, walk a mile in there shoes, After that Who cares, they are a mile away and you have thier shoes.

what do you want to be remembered for, a Kick Ass game that was heaps of fun, or that guy who had a great idea but killed it with too much garbage and gobbledegook.

(sorry for the digression)

I like this. A unique LARP is a good LARP. Creating a LARP that is independant of any other LARP system shows initiative and creativity…if it works.

Jared - are you looking for a set of guidelines for creating/running a larp, or a set of actual rules?

Jared, you’ve seen my second attempt at fantasy. Working on a Buffy/Chramed/Cthulhu campaign. Has some elements of my previous efforts, but has to adapted for city use, freestyle and fixed location play.

Hopefully that is what you are meaning. The core of it can be used as a GLURPs if I am lucky.

I agree on the first part, but not the second. If you’re not open to feedback from all parties, you may do the “never improve” thing. I’m more in line with Dogma99 here with the “Creators should be accountable” thing.

I’ll have something here (or a new thread) with my response soon. Bound to cause a stir :wink:

Most of these replies have missed my point. Some of you have posted strong views on how an ideal larp should be constructed in regards to manifestos etc. I was hoping for you actually say how you would do this. Lots of manifestos etc but no substance. What I intended was for those with strong views to tell me how they would actually use those ideals in actually making a larp.
The reason I wished people to not point out the negatives is because that is not constructive. I’m sure you’re all smart enough to tell people that you don’t agree with in more contructive ways than saying "i don’t agree with that"
Put your money where your mouths are and tell me something useful. As for “respect” based statements… ok so thats a mission statement… whats the vision and how would you action it… respect and fun are intrinsic
Jared

I’m about 40% of the way through mine. They take pretty careful planning! You’ve issued an excellent challenge and I wouldn’t miss one of those - but don’t forget it’s a big ask!

Jared, it’s not very surprising that you’re not getting what you want. Your description is very vague, so people are confused about what the challenge is. You need to communicate it better.

Are you looking for a set of fantasy larp rules? Or guidelines for running a fantasy larp? Or guidelines for writing fantasy larp rules? Or something else? All we have is this:

“Present the concepts necessary to create a LARP system which includes the best ideals from systems which currently exist or could exist as a result of this discussion”

“me how they would actually use those ideals in actually making a larp”

“whats the vision and how would you action it”

Are you looking for a set of guidelines for writing a larp, effectively an “approach”, with some examples of actual rules but not a whole rulebook? That’s what I gather, but I’m not 100% sure.

For example, I might have these as my ideals:

  • Make the larp as immersive as possible, minimising time spent thinking or talking out of character
  • Provide an intense dramatic experience to the players, based on relationships between characters
  • Focus the setting around the player characters, don’t force them down paths that don’t interest them

And then I might lay out how I would achieve this in actual rules, demonstrating how my character generation, conflict resolution, NPC briefings, etc. are designed to achieve this vision and providing a few actual examples.

Is this what you’re looking for?

I think I understand it.

[quote=“Jared”]My challenge is this:
Present the concepts necessary to create a LARP system which includes the best ideals from systems which currently exist or could exist as a result of this discussion.
It would need to be capable of coping with a popular fantasy LARP complete with magic, monsters, NPC and PC characters, and their interactions including combat.
I don’t expect detail but am immensely interested concepts and in how they could be adapted to multiple genres.
I am particularly in how systems may be stripped to the barest minimum of rules and still remain effective complete with magic, monsters, NPC and PC characters or even a blurred interface of both, and their interactions including combat.[/quote]

Here’s mine, bastardised from Dogma 99 with an eye for practicality and allowing for the fantastical. Written in dogma form to get discussion going (but I’m not putting my name at the bottom yet).

1. Players shall be responsible for advancing the whole event, not just their own character.
Organisers shall empower players to take responsibility.

2. It is forbidden to create action by writing it into the past history of a character or the event.
I’m keeping this.

3. The “main plot” and “main characters” shall be determined by the players and during the game, if at all.

4. Larp creators shall not write plot, they shall write a setting that plot can occur within.
This may include everything up to a given situation, in which the players find themselves in at the beginning of the event.

5. During the event, the organisers shall not start plot that has not been called for.
The setting may demand a certain event, but no “GM” may begin new plot.

5. Pysreps shall encourage drama.
A Mexican standoff is better than a shootout.

6. The fantastical shall be included only when it can be appropriately represented.
A camp-fire story is better than a crap dragon costume.

7. Players shall not measure anything in “points” or “levels”.
Hit points, magic points etc. are not a stand-in for responsible role-playing.

8. All involved persons are responsible for, and accountable to, their actions in the larp.
No organiser or player is excempt, and feedback should be clearly given after the event.

9. No player shall “wait” for another player before getting into character.

10. Rules shall be implicit and responsible role-playing shall take precedence over any written rules.
Players may “break” the “rules” at any time if doing so makes sense to the players. No discussion should be held until after the event.

This “dogma” establishes ideals but allows for stretching where “responsible” or necessary. It relies on creating a culture of playing the scene rather than playing the rules, and frowns upon “power playing” by making it look naff. I think this set of statements can appeal to a wide audience without excluding the minority of people that enjoy sword-swinging medieval fantasy (;)) or writing away their games.

That said, it’s still asking for change. Many events would need to change a lot of their culture to fit this.

It’s not “finely crafted” yet, I’ve only read it twice. But I’d be willing to take honest feedback.

Mmmm… it’s more of a mission statement for a player. With respect to being a culture designer for No Man’s Land, I’m writing setting: the only say I have in mechanics is a strongly worded suggestion (or puppy-eyed pleading when it comes to mechanics for poison (what can I say? I want people to worry about what they’re drinking)). If you’re interested in how I think about that task, read on.

In a sense No Man’s Land is designed by a committee - all the culture designers are working on their own things, talking among ourselves to iron out snags and spark ideas, and looking up to the GMs for a final say and advice on mechanics. I’m personally happier to have Stephanie as a partner to work with on my Culture - it’s not just having a damn smart and creative person giving input, it’s being able to bounce ideas and get a synergy going - we get a lot more done together than apart. I don’t think any of the Cultures have less than two people working on them right now.

No Man’s Land is intended to be Player-Driven. I’d say that’s the most important aspect of the design brief, affecting all the consequent building of the game. We aren’t working out storylines or set encounters, we’re working out settings that have inherent conflict. If all goes well, how the Players react to and resolve that conflict will create more, in a nice, juicy unfolding of the setting. I don’t think this kind of game would even be considered without a solid respect for the players to roleplay, and think, and strategise (some of the most delightful parts of Mordavia came to be through Player-Driven Plot).

Character backgrounds become very important - the ties that they have with other characters will mean a great deal. One of the reasons each of our Cultures is based on a historical setting is so that we get instant familiarity with dress styles and basic patterns of thought: it’s a quick and dirty way of getting people up to speed on their character background, and helps them tell, visually, who is probably going to be helpful to them.

When designing our particular Culture, the Free Cities, Steph and I had a brief, Frockcoats & Flintlocks/Renaissance, because a lot of people wanted the whole swashbuckling thing. Black powder, yeah! We took a bunch of other things, including my desire to play a particular kind of character (have fun!), and evolved a setting that has several distinct locations, a rough geography, basic trade agreements, lots of internal conflict, an ethos, an attitude to the other Cultures, at least two reasons for heading into the region where the games will take place, and well, you know, flair. We want players to want to inhabit our Culture.

We have distinct locations because we like colour, and because part of the Renaissance feel is loyalty to a city-state over loyalty to a country. The geography came from explanations of how the Free Cities came to be, and why they are seperated like they are. The visual look and flavour of each region had a lot to do with the geography: sometimes the lay of the land influenced a region, sometimes the way we wanted a city to be dictated how the land had to lie. With geography came items that each region finds easy to produce and we started thinking about balance of trade and so forth. We wanted to keep each place fairly equal in terms of power military and power economic, but we also thought about what they could make from where they were. One of the major grudges in our setting is between two cities that, logically, both have a lion’s share of the same trade but have very different philosophies about it. Now that should be interesting.

I believe that the Free Cities are interesting enough to campaign in all on their own, now. And that’s kind of cool. No, it’s really cool. There is still a lot of blank in there and, while we will be filling in a lot more gaps, we’re planning on letting the players add in stuff as they go - other people’s creativity is a wonderful thing, and it helps endear the setting to them.

There is a lot about the other Cultures that I just don’t know, and probably will never know. I will be playing in the game when it starts, and pretending not to know Out of Character information gets really tedious. As a Culture Designer… I know an awful lot about the Free Cities. I’d rather know as little about the secrets of the other characters as I can possibly manage.

And that took an excruciatingly long time to write, so I hope you don’t mind if I stop here. Is this the sort of information you had in mind?

Firstly to Ryan

Good

Yes, in relation to your views on manifestos or just how you would do it in general. People say full immersion or sans rules but HOW?

Also good:

[quote]For example, I might have these as my ideals:

  • Make the larp as immersive as possible, minimising time spent thinking or talking out of character
  • Provide an intense dramatic experience to the players, based on relationships between characters
  • Focus the setting around the player characters, don’t force them down paths that don’t interest them

And then I might lay out how I would achieve this in actual rules, demonstrating how my character generation, conflict resolution, NPC briefings, etc. are designed to achieve this vision and providing a few actual examples. [/quote]

Thanks Ryan

Jared

Next, Exquire

Now we’re heading down the road I was hoping for

[quote]1. Players shall be responsible for advancing the whole event, not just their own character.
Organisers shall empower players to take responsibility. [/quote]
Good, one hopes all larp includes this, unsaid or not.

[quote]2. It is forbidden to create action by writing it into the past history of a character or the event.
I’m keeping this.[/quote]
Thats fine, but is action as a result of past history ok?

Expand on this please.

[quote]4. Larp creators shall not write plot, they shall write a setting that plot can occur within.
This may include everything up to a given situation, in which the players find themselves in at the beginning of the event.[/quote]
SO a situation is described in some manner an it is left for the players to figure ou the solution? i.e. goblins have been attacking a village. Go figure it out. Is that it? (poor example maybe)

[quote]5. During the event, the organisers shall not start plot that has not been called for.
The setting may demand a certain event, but no “GM” may begin new plot.[/quote]
So as above but a GM should not solve the problem, it should all be player driven? This seem logical as any storyline rarely remains in contact with players. But I guess if a demon is required to do something in a situation a GM should not simply include one to solve it but players should find a way directly or whatever to make it so? (poor example maybe?)

[quote][b]5. Pysreps shall encourage drama.[b]
A Mexican standoff is better than a shootout. [/quote]
I agree but how do you have a mexican standoff with a zombie horde? For example

[quote]6. The fantastical shall be included only when it can be appropriately represented.
A camp-fire story is better than a crap dragon costume.[/quote]
SO best work on a kick ass dragon costume then!

[quote]7. Players shall not measure anything in “points” or “levels”.
Hit points, magic points etc. are not a stand-in for responsible role-playing.[/quote]
Ok so when it does come down to the wire what happens when the goblin stabs you in the back? Or you want to blast the beggar with a firebolt?

[quote]8. All involved persons are responsible for, and accountable to, their actions in the larp.
No organiser or player is excempt, and feedback should be clearly given after the event. [/quote]
That makes perfect sense.

What do you mean? I thought in game meant in character?

[quote]10. Rules shall be implicit and responsible role-playing shall take precedence over any written rules.
Players may “break” the “rules” at any time if doing so makes sense to the players. No discussion should be held until after the event.[/quote]
Fair enough, what situations would be necessary for this?

All in all the concepts here are fine… however are sword swingers truely a minority? Guess sthat could be debated till the cows come home. Still i think we should always be catered for… i am a sword swinger.
Cheers Exquire
Jared
[/quote]

"theamazingcatherine"
Thanks for your reply… you made very good points for the creation of game setting and broad (no not board) game creation.
It is very useful in terms of being able to then immerse characters within what could be a living setting, which would have a character of its own.
Coupled with a successful rule structure your approach would create not only a game but a quasi world.
This I’m sure would go a long way in driving “world plot” or non GM generated plot, which I guess would be generated simply by the characters interaction with the world or a part of it.
Cool, Thanks Catherine.

Jared

There is a world of difference between Feedback and negativity, someone who is saying that this idea will work better if you do this, is being helpful.

however someone who says you cant do that because some dribbling geek on the other side of the world had a brain fart is being negative.

I believe that having faith in your idea is very important, and with that comes the courage to say this is mine and I am keeping it.

As you do with your games, if i told you that Nibbles wont work because of some idea i had that clashed with one of your ideas what would your response be?

If you were playing I’d be especially interested - you’d have a unique insight :wink:

If you were someone from the other side of the world I didn’t know, I’d still be open to considering it - what if it’s that great idea I hadn’t thought of yet…?

Negativity is negativity, but be careful not to label the good feedback you really want as “negativity” and ignore it.

Jared, clarification coming. I’m glad you recieved my dogma so well!

Hi peps,
I have some replies to make but I have been busy playing bob the builder today (haha you could call it full immersion roleplaying as it fits a bunch of the dogma criteria :smiling_imp: ) and don’t have the mental capacity right now.

Jared

[quote=“Exquire”]
Negativity is negativity, but be careful not to label the good feedback you really want as “negativity” and ignore it.[/quote]

Ahhh :wink: That is the trick isn’t it, knowing the garbage from the gold.