Whispers in the Darkness - A possible new LARP

Auckland
#1

This is something I’ve been toying with for a bit, and if there is enough interest I may even run it. Please take a look and tell me what you think.

“Whispers in the Darkness” is a victorian gothic larp using a modified version of the OLD Ravenholme rules with a completely rehashed magic system, reduced combat skill tree and an expanded knowledge skill list. I started working on it when the NEW version of the Ravenholme rules came out and I entered discussion with the GMs about what was wrong with just fixing the old rules and this is my attempt done with the blessings of the majority of those involved with Ravenholme. There is still a few things that need to be worked on, Such as the dueling section which may or may not end up getting done (which is in red)

[attachment=0]WITD_Ver1.zip[/attachment]

#2

Does a lack of responses and downloads mean a lack of interest in a Victorian Gothic Horror LARP?

#3

No, it means people are on holiday over Xmas break, possibly away from internet. I’ve just seen this now…

#4

hmm, as a substitute for Darkness (in the name) would you consider wispers in the caliginous haze? my reasons for asking as that would result in the name WITCH. alternatively just WITH works. Witd? whats Witd?

#5

regarding the magic - from what ive read it seems that there is no difference regarding what style or flavour of magic you choose in terms of what spells you can get (except dark magics). could this be represented by the way in which, for example, voodoo priests cast their magic compared with middle eastern mystics? can you put in some guidelines as to what players using this magic should use when casting their spells that makes each look like a unique way of casting the magic.

regarding the dueling idea, the problem i would have with it is players starting duels with their uber buffed characters so they can get heaps of extra xp at the end by killing off lots of other players characters. one way to get around this is to award the xp only if the underdog wins, and the way you judge this is by working out the difference between the amount of skills people have put into combat abilities. so say person (A) has tough x3, weapon x1, fortitude x1, and they loose against person (B) with tough x2, weapon x1, person (B) gets 3 xp (1 for winning, 2 for the difference). however if (A) wins then no experience is gained from the fight (1 xp for winning, minus 2 for the difference, to a minimun of 0xp). also if there are two person ©’s fighting, the winner gets 1 xp (for winning, plus or minus nothing for the difference). the weapons used should also be standardized - someone wielding a longer sword has an obvious advantage. their is another problem with people underpowering characters when they have OOC martial experience. one way get over this is to subtract 1 xp again from the winner if they initiated the duel (still to a minimum of 0xp). so in the case of (A) vs (B), if (A) initiates the duel and win, they get 0xp, if they loose (B) gets 3 xp (1 for winning, 2 for the difference). if (B) initiates the duel and looses, (A) doesnt get anything - the duel was too easy for them - but if they win they get only 2 xp (1 for winning, 2 for the difference, minus 1 for starting the duel). in the case of © vs ©, the initator gets nothing for winning, if they loose the other person gets 1 xp.

just a thought. hope its understandable

#6

Out of interest as a fellow game writer, I have downloaded this file and offer the following advice/criticism:

If you are going to have dueling XP, it should be judged at the GM’s descretion on all accounts. If you give the players a formula for dueling, well, it smacks of metagamery and will only enchance this issue. Rules lawyers. I need not say more.

If they must duel, they must duel for good character reasons. Giving no reason for PVP outside of deeply in character reasons is maybe the best way of doing this. Killing characters shouldn’t be rewarded itself. Forwarding the game by doing so should be. Good luck with that though.

Magic seems a bit sterile and homogenous as mentioned previous. Stating that spells can be cast x times per day is not the fantastical standard. Not that it wouldn’t work, it just doesn’t seem logical… I know a spell but for some reason I can only cast it once, regardless of my mental capacity… yeah, no.

Also, what is the expected character survival rate? It seems from the ability tree’s that unless you cast magic, well its a little limited in scope. If a character is only likely to survive one game, then this probably isn’t an issue.

Would I want to play it based on its current merits? If I had the time and resources, yes. Of course I’d give most things a go once if I could.

#7

[quote=“Jared”]If you are going to have dueling XP, it should be judged at the GM’s descretion on all accounts. If you give the players a formula for dueling, well, it smacks of metagamery and will only enchance this issue. Rules lawyers. I need not say more.

If they must duel, they must duel for good character reasons. Giving no reason for PVP outside of deeply in character reasons is maybe the best way of doing this. Killing characters shouldn’t be rewarded itself. Forwarding the game by doing so should be. Good luck with that though.[/quote]I wholeheartedly agree with this. However, going by the little Cameron has told me about it, the system is most definitely “at GM’s discretion”.

#8

My point is also this: If players know they will be rewarded for PVP then they will engage in this activity in order to gain XP. This is how cheese muffin/rules lawyers work.

So, don’t suggest that they get XP for duelling at all. If they do and the roleplaying reasons are good, reward for the roleplaying and character development not the outcome.

Still being a GM is really hard, and XP rewards for game play are amongst the hardest of tasks.

Good luck!

#9

Surprisingly enough, Jared, at previous games it hasn’t worked that way at all. At the Capulets vs Montagues Ravenholme, which was SET UP as an almost entirely PVP game, it took an NPC tantrum on the last morning to get the players to even attempt to kill each other. Most of the time, players don’t like to kill other players for anything other than the deepest of IC reasons, possibly because we know how much time and effort we spend on our own.

Nightmare Circle is another story entirely, of course. :smiling_imp:

#10

I knew dueling was going to be a contentious matter (hence why its in red and may not live to see the final version)

But…you may note…

  1. The XP would be for surviving a DUEL not jumping someone and going “have at thee!” a duel would be a dignified matter…and a duel is only a duel if two gentlemen agree to it. It would only be if certain rules were followed, there would be a strict “code of the duel” or no xp would be awarded. GM veeto on in this area could be as simple as “officials” (such as magistrates, mayors, noteries etc) declining to oversee the duel.

  2. I’ve been looking at the possibility of a duel being a more equal footing where the chances of winning or loosing are about as even split as possible (This would stop buffed combat characters soaking up XP by mowing through PCs). A more skilled opponent wouldn’t have to accept (which would mean he’d have the upper hand in the combat) but would loose social face for declining. The XP would tempt the more experianced combat player into trying his chances to get the XP, but increase his chance of loosing the character. A duel would allow non combat players to level the feild with people of higher skill. But the main point is that the XP is only given for duels that are done “The Right Way”. Once again a section still in the works. If players are reluctent to kill each other, good. But if they are going to kill each other any way lets encourage people to face each other in a little less chaotic manner and maybe level the feild between a scolar and soldier a little. And besides Duels are a very stylistic part of the victorian era. Right now toying with the idea of restricting “official duels” to be pistols only (as skill plays less of a part in a pistol duel compared to swords) and each player being taken by the official to prepare and determining the out come of the duel then having those involved play it out.

  3. We’re talking one XP for the possibility of loosing your character. One XP… I don’t want to give any more cause I agree that would encourage “farming PC death” but 1 XP I dont think will tempt people to go out of their way to enter duels.

4)Dueling I dont have to keep. I just think duels are nice dramatic, stylistic parts of the genre and setting Just putting it out there for discussion.

Other notes:

  1. The Limiting of some of the Magic to X times a day…balance…if the heal spell is unlimited it makes first aid pointless. Unlimited Blind/Mute/Sleep would be too good and you’d get a “blind! blind! blind! blind!” thing going on as opposed to the stratigic application of a little curse here and there.

  2. Magic, I think is a hard thing to get right. And a particular thing I think thats hard to get right is balance between spells that are avalible to some but not others without getting them rather complex with “except in this case…” and “not usable inside” and “this counter acts this and in turn counters this”. So for now I was going with the all spells avalible to all people, the “Schools” are just a stylistic thing again lets you know the angle your coming to magic from. This (my belief is) will also go some way to stopping the “7 users of this school, 2 of this, 1 of this and none of the other” syndrome that school based magic can have due to some powers being better or more use. As for “Dark Magics”; as they are a case by case basis anyway, I saw no harm in allowing some of those to be “School Specific” by having different ways to cast them or having effects exclusive to their school.

  3. The Rules will always be open to change and tweaking…no system is fool proof first time (Mordavia went through a bunch of changes from the early “elf charisma” days to the final product) More merits can be added as we go.

But from what I’m hearing besides the Dueling XP rule (which I’ll only introduce if people are happy with) people are reasonably happy with the rules thus far. May look into the possibility of School related magic merits and give it some thought.

#11

For those of you wanting school specific spells I am currently looking at adding ONE per school to start with…with possible expansion for more if balanced spells of equal usefulness can be thought up. More powerful spells of course will be reserved for dark magics.

#12

[quote=“Cameron”]For those of you wanting school specific spells I am currently looking at adding ONE per school to start with…with possible expansion for more if balanced spells of equal usefulness can be thought up. More powerful spells of course will be reserved for dark magics.[/quote]Wait, what was the incredibly good reason to not go into dark magics again? I forgot, and when the powerful spells are there, its highly attractive without a good reason against it.

#13

I’ll just assume thats sarcasm :slight_smile: if not then your totaly the sort of player we want.

#14

So just to gauge interest again, now its a year later:

Who’d be interested in a victorian gothic horror larp?

A bit of works been done on the rules since the above version (cracked them out after my exams) inclueding school specific spells and removal of the XP for duels, but are still in the proof reading stage.

#15

it sounded good at st. wolfgangs, especially the gothic part. can i wear this?=

#16

yep

#17

squee