We Need To Talk

I haven’t posted anything in a while. I have things written – quite a few things. I’ve got things I need to get off my chest, things I simply want to write about and things that are just ideas I feel I should throw into the great aether of the internet – they might help someone, or get lost forever, but that’s for others to decide, not me.

Partly, I’ve had a lot a real-life stuff to deal with that hasn’t been great, partly there’s been some relief of not reliving the same memories over and over – why do I torture myself? – and partly it’s been the things that I want to write and talk about that’s been the issue.

Because, in the LARP community, there’s just things you don’t talk about. Not because they’re racist, or homophobic or whatever, not like that. Something, I think, is much darker than that.

LARPers don’t want you to make them look bad.

Why do I say that and not ‘LARPers don’t want you to make LARP look bad’? For the simplest reason of all – LARP is a hobby that one spends a lot of time, money and socialising invested in – as a person only has so much time spare, socialising itself is a capital along with time, meaning that outside of work and some personal issues at home, for many LARPers, their life revolves around LARP.

For LARPers then, any part of the community and its lifestyle is very, very personal. Any slight taken against a game that a LARPer plays at, minor criticism of a game, of a person in the community, of an aspect of the culture gets take too literal, too deep and as ‘offensive’ without really seeing the bigger picture or the intent behind it (see some previous posts about people takign everything to heart!)

I’ve been a bit lucky really the past couple of years – I joined a game system that I wrote an article about, and the game organisers didn’t shun me for it, but the opposite, they embraced it and made minor changes to the game that’s made it visibly better (I will write another article about it) and ask for my opinion at times. In my experience, this isn’t what normally happens at LARP.

I’ll give you an example: look at this article written by LARP Guide member Leah Tardivel (yes, we’re back to looking at this, but they’re one of the few article machines out there that talk openly).

A LARP Guide team member that’s never played the Lorien Trust game system attended and wrote a review on her experience.

The first and third comments on the article are direct attacks. Not justifications, not counter-points (as I countered about ‘That Event is Too Expensive’ – even though my counter was very critical and inflammatory, it didn’t attack), not even ‘yeah, I see what you mean… but...’ or ‘come back and have another go’.

No. Leah was struck with ‘your fault, you didn’t get involved’ and ‘you didn’t use maps’ and ‘well, that’s just your experience’.

First – I’m glad Leah got to experience LT that way, and the snobbish replies afterwards. Leah saying about the difficulties she had, what she perceived of the game and the replies she got were exactly what new players get to large system - particularly those new to LARP.

Leah might be surprised to learn that she criticised the exact areas of the game that I had problems with when I started CP - and she's a CP lover.

Being ‘new’ no-one wants to talk to you much – you get pushed to the edge where you see the crappier costumes. You must find your way around, and there certainly wasn’t a lot of maps handy at CP when I started around 15 years back. Sure, the guide had a map at the back – but if you were new you didn’t have a guide, and not knowing a lot of people, you don’t always want to ask, especially when someone points out that it’s something OOC ‘ruining IC immersion’.

New players struggle to get plot – or indeed, anything or anywhere – new players struggle to find out what’s going on. Of course, this isn’t true for all new players, but the majority, certainly. Many long-term LARPers won’t notice this, however, as, even if they’ve never played CP before, they’ll have friends they can go see and talk to. They’ll set an IC excuse as to why people that have never met before are best friends, so they can hang around their OOC friends without worry.

And those veterans LARPers that do notice these problems know that – at least for them – it won’t last long as they’ll find their own way into the game, know the general steps to take etc. Even though learning this takes years. Unless you have a friend willing to guide you, LARP generally leaves you out in the cold.

And that’s exactly my point. The two commenters didn’t want ‘their’ game looking bad – Leah didn’t realise that the exact things she criticised are also in her game. 

LARP doesn’t want to talk about its problems.

A friend posted on Facebook something about people saying ‘you shouldn’t hold grudges’ and being bullied, and then, of course not wanting to be friends with that person again, because well, you were bullied by them (duh?)

I lost a friendship around this time last year – because I had dared criticise a friend of a friend. I was explaining to my friend that this guys had recently joined the small parlour LARP I attend, seemingly because he knows I attend it. This guy used to send quite abusive emails and messages on Facebook to me.

At the time, when I pointed it out to people I was told to keep it under wraps – we didn’t want to upset others do we?

This time, it was almost like I was the one abusing my friend – how dare I say such nasty thing about his friend? If you read ‘5 Geek Social Fallacies’, you’ll see why – my friends have to also be friends. No one can not get along.

Another friend I know has recently posted up about the sexual abuse she suffered from someone she met at LARP that has scarred her for life – and how another LARP friend has been bullying her into going to a game where this guy is known to attend.

My friend has spent 6 or 7 posts trying to justify why she doesn’t want to go, and that she shouldn’t put herself in an abusive situation again.

6 posts. At least.

What a loading of utter fucking bollocks!

If she doesn’t want to go, she shouldn’t have to defend herself, or justify herself. It’s her choice! Leave it at that!

LARP doesn’t want to talk about its problems.

“Wait, yes it does! I’ve seen loads of articles about dealing with abuse at LARP!”

Yes, you probably have. I have. Like this one: 19 Truths about Harassment, Missing Stairs, and Safety in Larp Communities.

The article mentions all the things that can happen at LARP – without directly asserting that they do, in fact, happen, except in a round-about ‘it happens in the macrocosm, therefore it happens in the microcosm’ spurious kind of way. It mentions all the bad things that can happen, and the pledges we must pro-actively strive to include to make sure these things don’t happen.

I have a couple of major issues with this article that I’d like to deal with in another article, but mainly, whilst I praise the article for its candour and for being empowering and honest, it doesn’t resolve anything. It doesn’t mean anything. You can pledge all kinds of things you want, but when the worst happens, you’re going to need to know how to make it better.

LARP doesn’t. It sweeps it under the proverbial carpet. ALL LARPs should make the pledges mentioned in this article – and once again, I despair that such things must written out for people – and yet, the community still struggles with the basic principle of policing itself in a humane manner.

LARP doesn’t want to talk about its problems – the community will says that maybe there is some, so it looks like its talking about its problems – but it isn’t.

Recently, another friend of mine was telling me about how his friend at CP is suffering from harassment from another player couple, and how she’s possibly having to move factions because of it. Apparently, not all of it has been by messenger either – some of it has been by constant texts and telephone calls, by threats and even to her face.

What would you do? In a normal, everyday situation? At work? What would you do?

You’d complain to a higher manager, wouldn’t you? You’d go to an employment law adviser, wouldn’t you? You’d save it all up and go to the police, wouldn’t you?

Wouldn’t you?

There’s no such recourse in LARP. It’s worse if the person in question has influential friends in nthe LARP community. It’s worse if the person in question is friends with the ref team. It’s worse when they are the referee team.

I wasn’t ‘allowed’ to speak about the messages and grief I used to get from players. I can only imagine the situation this young lady is trapped in, no one to speak to, no way to sort it out other than change her life.

When I said to my friend that maybe what she should do is publish the texts and messages she receives, my friend said “well, no she can’t do that…”

“Why not?”

“She’d get lots of people upset”

Hang on. She’s being abused emotionally and she isn’t allowed to say anything? She isn’t ‘allowed’ to stand up for herself? In the article, it mentions Missing Stairs – players simply avoiding the issue, moving to another location or another game, whatever. Skirting around it.

That’s exactly what this woman is expected to do – but it’s not coming from her. It’s coming from the community. Others are expecting her to not speak out.

LARP doesn’t want to talk about its problems – it knows it has them, but doesn’t want to admit it.

A friend posted another article to me: Remember, The Party is Under No Obligation to Adventure With You. This is accurate and right – though again, I’d like to express more in another article.

The issue here is though – is it’s not being dealt with. It’s pushing it to one side.

In the LARP community, this is often the way certain people are ‘dealt’ with. Look on most forums, for example, players will often say cheaters are ‘ignored’ or ‘avoided’. I know one cheat that was ignored so much he became a referee.

LARP doesn’t want to talk about its problems.

But it needs to. And it needs to sort them out.

Alchemy over Essence?

I remember that when I ran Thracia a few players that bought the Alchemy skill complained that it ‘never worked’, was ‘broken’ or was ‘too complicated’.

There were a number of reasons for these complaints – but, the most common was players ignorance and bitching.

Now, I’m not going to blame the players here. A few failings on behalf of the Game Team:

1. Complaints were never dealt with. I wasn't 'allowed' to approach players because then I was “being a bully, telling them what to do” and the other referees dismissed players concerns as “they’re just being stupid”
2. The process should have been presented and described to players. I was told this would lead them to “cheating based on OOC knowledge". I was also told this was a bad idea because “LARP and magic shouldn’t be number crunching” – despite the fact this is exactly what I had been planning with Alchemy; magical maths!
3. I should have described the process in the rulebook – see the above negative comments
4. There needed to be a blog-like post issued which handled the concerns and addressed issues – so there was an official response to worries and people had a frame of reference. I was told it “would only upset everyone. People would moan about it”
5. Players needed official feedback so they could see what they needed to do better – I was told any feedback was “fuel for the bitching fire”
6. Clearer indications of how powerful something was, was needed. I was told that “players prefer being in the dark because then there’s more exploration” – the nature of “game” and “risk” being entirely ignored by the referees

However, players began to neither listened to, nor attempted to understand the rules for Alchemy – which is understandable, as the Game Team had effectively let them down just one too many times.

I remember one player left to play Aftermath because he thought the Game Team was out to get him and was trying to cheat him – when I approached him about it he cited the last 7 times his Alchemy ‘failed’.

The thing was, his Alchemy hadn’t failed on any of those times. They’d done exactly what he requested, exactly what he wanted, each time. What was wrong was he was expecting the Game Team to “you know what I meant” and “be able to get the gist of the way I wanted it”. He was also expecting Alchemy to be like other spell-casting (a ‘point and click’ approach) which it wasn’t. Alchemy was not battle magic; it was a tool and should have been used as such and not twisted to meet his own subjective interpretations we desperately had to guess at.

Alchemy was a process of points. To link two objects via Alchemy was 1 point. From there, the second object could be manipulated through second – it was a ‘sympathetic’ link.

For example, if I had 2 twigs, I could sympathetically link them for 1 point. A further 1 point could be expended for the second twig to empathetically respond to the first when I set the first on fire. The second twig would then also burst aflame.

I could do this from 1 twig to 2 others for a further 1 point – 1 more sympathetic link.

Where it got a little weirder was if the second object wasn’t like the first – say, if the second was a stone. Well, I’d have to expend more points to heat the stone, simply because the twig wasn’t like the stone.

Right?

Well, the first object – the ‘focus’ was given a mark out of 5 by the referee – 1 being “not at all like the target” and 5 being “the same thing as the target”. This was added to the player’s points total.

Then it was divided by 3. This gave the spell a ‘Rank’.

All spells in the game were listed by Rank. The equivalent of Level 1 spells in CP (‘Confusion’, ‘Mend’, ‘Lesser Healing’) were Ranks 1-3. The equivalent of Level 2 spells in CP (‘Greater Healing’, ‘Magic Missile’) were Ranks 5-6.

Following the example above:

• 2 metal armours, linked – 1 point
• 1st armour is like the 2nd (same material, same shape and size) – 5 points
• Total: 6 points
• Divide 3:  Rank 2
• Effect: Equivalent to a Level 1 (Ranks 1-3) spell – i.e. break the first armour = reduce the second armour by 1 point

• 1 twig, 1 stone
• Stone in circle, not like the twig – 1 point
• Total: 2 points
• Divide 3: 0.3, No Rank
• Effect: set light to the twig, nothing happens

The only real thing the players needed to worry about was the wording – players had to tell us what they wanted the spell to do – and this is exactly the same for any other magic, anywhere. The problem was exactly what I just said – the player waved their hands vaguely and used to tell us that “well, I wanna… you know… with…. That…. And them over there…. And… yeah”

Finding him bitching to another game system about our rules not working and putting off potentially new players due to his lack of effort and understanding was… disappointing.

Age of Essence is a LARP that has spell-casting rules developed from the Alchemy rules from Thracia. Luke Still, the creator of Age of Essence was a Thracia player – one that for 3 years described my game as “the best system he has ever played”.

I remember talking to him about possibly changing Alchemy so it was a system of beads of ‘crystallised magic’ that could be drawn from a variety of sources.

We discussed a player possibly being able to draw only from certain materials to start, and as they progressed, the skill expanded to allow drawing magic from other sources. The idea became that crystallised magic – a things “essence” – were exchangeable and tradeable by Alchemists, who then used the beads to fuel Alchemy.

The beads would be a physical reminder of the power you’re using. I was also suggesting that herbal and crafting material cards have numbers on them which would also be their value for affecting the Alchemy. The rules would otherwise be the same.

I then also had the idea of having all the beads as white, and introducing red and blue beads to the mix – red was ‘corrupted’ essence and blue was ‘crystal faith’. If you drew a number of red or blue this became a secondary effect to the Alchemy – the number drawn being the Rank, rather than divisible by 3. This would be the inherently unstable nature of Alchemy – red meaning the caster possibly suffers the blow-back event.

Luke developed this idea onto the colours being from ‘elements’ and Alchemy becoming spell-casting.

I see Luke has since developed a system from this that allows for some interesting spells, and interesting magic – it works, and that’s good. I do think it’s a bit DnD, and lacks the investigative, explorative and dangerous (read: exciting) nature of what I had in mind, however. Its is also, unfortunately, ridiculously complicated to the point that I'm not sure how playable it actually is in practice - seen by the numerous changes that have occurred to it, and still are occurring.

I also think that his dividing it into ‘Lawful’ and ‘Chaos’ was developed from my idea of the red and blue beads somehow creating additional effects, which along with the way Thracia was set up (like LT) with ‘Light’ and ‘Dark’ alliances, strengthened to  imply that sides were ‘good’ and ‘evil’, like any good’ol fashioned RPG. It's not my taste, and it's way too restrictive for the clever uses that could be gained from a more neutral perspective, but if that's the way it's working for him, cool.

Maybe one day I’ll get to play around with my original idea and see how well it worked or didn’t. I’m pretty confident it’d work quite well, and I reckon it’d be fun where the beads could else be used – Rituals? Forged into armour and weapons?

Anyway, I’m glad someone got some good use out of it and that it’s going well.

Right in the feels!

At the start of the year I decided to branch out and look for a new LARP. I’d been away from the scene for a year and a half or so – but I’d also lost a lot of people I thought were friends.

I’m socially awkward, afraid of new situations and people, nervous about, well, just about any social interaction – I find ordering in a restaurant, shop or simply buying tickets at a booth really hard work.

Which is weird, because I role-play confident, usually rich or sycophantic, often religious or scientific – and commonly either outspoken or extremely paranoid. I guess that playing a character allows me to open up and say and do things I normally can’t – it’s like if it happens to my character, it’s not happening to me.

Many LARPers experience this kind of dissonance. As their character they’re able explore personalities, traits and social situations they wouldn’t otherwise. I think it’s one of the most wonderful and profound things about LARP – it often creates a greater kind of empathy with situations in real-life that we wouldn’t otherwise understand, and even in heavy-combat games, makes us more aware of our own reality.

I can exactly see why LARPers seem a weird bunch – or slightly insane – in this regard. We often disassociate ourselves from our characters. Though a character’s personality is often based on our own to degree – overly emphasising personality characteristics or projecting the opposite – it’s common to refer to the character in the third person. This is because what we do ‘as our character’ should not be a reflection on ourselves. We’re not our character, no matter how much we may seem like them.

I think I was quite brave at the start of the year – to approach a new game, and, after being welcomed very warmly – attend a game with no one I knew, completely alien, middle of the unknown in Kent with no way back… I was scared. Wouldn’t you be? I was nervous as hell.

Every LARP has a social aspect, to a degree. I agree, it’s probably not suited for every LARP to have a mechanic for it, but I do feel every LARP should develop the social aspect – and not just because IC brings OOC together (cool story, bro!) but because of exactly those kinds of interactions that develop that we don’t get in real life.

I have played a few LARPs and experienced a mixture of situational role-playing techniques. The greatest disappointment to me was the lack of social depth in a great many of them – from larger scale fest-sized to even small games like Alrune and Dragon Lore. Without the social comment element the game is losing out and is by its very definition, stunted. It’s a halted growth, an ever-larp-tionary dead-end. It might sound unfair – but there it is. I feel really sorry for players in these systems that never get to experience these systems.

I’m glad to say that this is the thing Camarilla Invictus gets right. It’s exactly the social aspect of the game – the open interaction and deliberation too (and, by LARPers being mature! Shock!) – that has brought the players together in very meaningful ways. They’ve got a strong bond between them – and they’re very empathic and inclusive too.

CI gets right what other LARPs I’ve played simply don’t. I’m not going to say it’s no through hard work because I know running a game is a lot harder than it appears (I’ve heard this appearance as being like a duck – calm on the surface, all kinds of motion to stay afloat underneath). But I do believe the approach CI uses – one that I was trying to get going in my LARP I was running years ago – is easily translatable to other games.

I honestly think in other games, either don’t know how to do it; are stuck in a rut; don’t want to explore those avenues because it’s ‘not what the ref team want’; due to lack of compassion for certain types of players (I know there’s a lack of compassion for non-combatants in a lot of the games I played); or simply they don’t care.

Cl does what every game should do. After monstering the mid-year combat-based Linear game for CI, I can happily vouch that CI does it right – the Linear had combat, puzzles, mental interactions, role-playing all in good measure. Why is this important? Because it means it includes everyone – every person has a part to play and the game isn’t dominated by some over others – whereas in the games I’ve played in the past, referees seem to focus on combat, thinking that “hitting stuff is plot” and usually disparaging other interactions. Even my own ref team did this – they could see the ‘puzzle’ aspect for advancing games, but definitely weren’t interested in most other forms of interaction. Non-combatants in these games are left at the borders of the game – it’s happened to me, and certainly happened to the players in my game when I stepped down from actively overseeing the game.

Combat is not plot. Monsters aren’t plot. War is not plot. Just to make the point drive home: politics is not plot. Social scale is not plot. Role-playing is not plot.

 

What’s plot?

 

The interactions between players formed of all of these things. A little of this and that, and the other – and oh! That too! That’s plot.

I’ll take you through the last game, and you can see what I mean.

The game started off in a comparatively relaxing way – swapping rumours (omg! Gossip! Brilliant mechanic!... ahem…). I’d just got round to talking business with a friend when – BANG!- a chair gets knocked over and a long-term Court member has brought claws and fangs to bear on another long-term Court member. There’s proverbial blood all over the place, people are shouting and screaming and I’m running like a bitch to the other end of the hall.

The attacker is hauled in front of the Court’s Council and we wait their verdict. We’re then called to stand witness to his trial. Perhaps he’d done some wrong things in the past, and pissed off the wrong people. But, he’d been a friend to a lot of people too.

The character was executed with everyone watching.

First, I got shivers. I remembered – “this can happen to me too”. I could feel my character shutting everything off, trying to feel no emotion. Inside I’m getting upset, and I’m realising my character is trying to stop himself being scared. Then I shivered again – the atmosphere hit a feel low, and I realise everyone else is feeling much the same thing. My character’s then getting angry – and this is where I’m going to sound mad – and I can feel the heat from it.

We took a breather – I think most of us needed it.

What happened there is called ‘bleed’ – it’s where IC emotion spills over into Real Life. It affects the player and it can cut as sharp as a knife, burn like a fire, or wound like a punch. It’s the most powerful thing any LARP can do, because it reaches inside and pushes all those little buttons you think you’ve locked away.

Partly it’s like watching an emotional film and you feel yourself crying or drawn into it. But, you have to realise you’re in the film, so another part of you is like a participant in it too.

I was a participant in that trail and execution – and it was horrifying.

Most players reacted in a similar way to those suffering grief – some cried, others went quiet; some began to get reasonable and to explain the reasons behind it happening.

Because, in a way, they did. They’d got to know the character, judge his mannerisms and moods. He was, in a very real sense, a friend – and they’d just lost him. I was reacting in a similar way.

It sounds like a bad thing – what with the crying and pain. But it’s not.

The wonderful thing about LARP is that even when this bleed happens, it’s blunted – we know it doesn’t affect us in an absolute direct way, even though it feels like it does.

This kind of thing – is exactly the winning element with any LARP – that, as a tool, LARP can be used to encourage  bonds of friendship, love and trust to grow between players; it can foster new experiences and build personality, character and personal philosophy; it allows formative development of a person’s psychology; it brings the shy like me out of their shells; it shares a common emotion between people that then share an experience together; it builds and encourages development as a person.

In the same way sports bring people together for similar reasons, LARP is a journey within – but it reaches places no sport reaches, for you’re an active part of the tale.

So, that was the game I took part in at the weekend. And leading from that, I’m still shocked that the ‘social’ parts of games are ignored or looked down upon – particularly, as I said, but the ‘combat only’ lot – I’m still shocked that CI is referred to as ‘only a social’ game, often with the attachment ‘so therefore it must be boring’.

Boring?

Fuck no.

Camarilla Invictus - Up Close and Personal Review

I gave Camarilla Invictus a rating of 4 out of 5.

At the start of this year, I said to myself and others that I would start to do more.

The past two years have been reclusive for me. I've stayed away from a lot of people, avoided social interactions and slowly lost old friends - mainly, I suppose because our goals in life are no longer shared. All this, not because I wanted to - but because I felt that's what should happen. I suppose I needed a clean break from the past to start things over - perhaps I needed time to separate myself from those events. Part of me feels that it's because with what happened, I must have done something so bad that I just didn't deserve to be around people. My condition means I think this way - it's taken a long time (over a decade) to come to terms with the fact that I don't need these thoughts - and that they're not mine to have.

I can't choose how I feel. I can choose what I do about it.

So, I've decided to start LARP again (heaven knows why - this is explored in another post).

I was looking around at various LARPs in my area, and LARPs I can actually get to. Needless to say, there aren't a lot that I'd be up for doing, for one reason or another, such as:

• Unfair, unbalanced, bigoted system set-up
• Attitudes of some players (believe me... will also be explored in another post)
• I really don't want to use a calculator...

After asking around a bit, I was invited to Camarilla Invictus. Within a couple of hours I was warmly greeted, was in a conversation with a referee, have an offer of a lift and was invited to the group.

That was quick!

That's a bit different from my experiences so far with LARP, even after a decade - so I thought, why not? Camarilla Invictus is based off White Wolf's first impression of the World of Darkness game Vampire: The Masquerade. It's a gothic-punk, socio-political orientated story-based role-play. That doesn't convey the experience very well I admit, but you'll pick it up from what I have to say.

I was given a lift by a good man called Michael, who was very chatty with me. We talked and swapped stories, which was great because it helped me relax - I don't know how nervous I seemed! When we arrived I had another new experience - players there actually came over, said hello, introduced themselves, gave me some low-down on the game setting and some tips - phew! Around friendly people at last!

We arrived at an old university - the type that its alumni compare to Oxford or Cambridge because of its size, vast green grounds, old Georgian red brick and marble-columned entrance halls with carved oak and stained panel staircases, doors and gargoyles. It was a very good setting for a game of dark Vampire mystery.

I was left to my own devices for a while, but was warmly greeted by those that came through the doors after my host and me. The other players milled around for a while and then a couple of nice ladies came to me and we chatted - it was a nice, no-pressure ease into the group, and they gave me some extra tips and this-is-what-you-know stuff that helped me later with the game story so far. They helped describe my Character Sheets, showing me things like Health and combat works, Fortitude and such - things that, unfortunately, I didn't get from the Wikidot (which serves as the game's website).

After safety checks (nice to see!) and newbie brief (it was a bit brief...) the scene was set and we moved into the banquet hall.

The game itself consisted of walking around the room, chatting to various others. Court is usually a place of comparative safety for those that serve a Prince Vampire, so there was no combat. A ban had also been placed against using Powers at Court, so there was no real 'Calls' being used. So, walking, talking... and that was it. This isn't a bad thing, by any stretch of the imagination, however.

To me, there are two distinct attitudes at LARPs I've encountered - either a LARP is lots of combat or has some combat but little else social-wise. This was entirely different as the game focused on social interaction - something us geeks are notoriously bad at. This, I thought, was exactly right for geeks - gets them out of their shell by being someone else, gets people talking, exploring new ways of communicating - brilliant, love it. It's also a great way to bring people into a game - and partly, exactly what I wanted from my previous game and what I want from my current one. Players could make friends, catch up with friends and if they wanted to talk Out of Character, they just walked to one side.

At points during the event, the players were informed about changes of roles of certain members, a Prince was lost and one temporarily placed. Movements of territory were planned and claims were staked in areas of land. Apart from a menace in the background, most of this didn't really make sense to me. Don't get me wrong, I understood many of the implications of certain things, I'm just not sure why they were considered part of playing or the 'plot'. These elements, whilst they affect players, are not part of the game - they could be decided Downtime.

There was indeed plot to be had - but, I felt it was in a Curious Pastimes kind of way - one that I have found distinctly unfair to players and what eventually was a point of contention in my previous LARP. Perhaps that was just my impression because it was my first game.

On one table there was a picture of a beast made out of faces that Characters would recognise, apparently drawn by a psychic. The players were encouraged to ponder its meaning and it proved a pivotal turning point for decisions later made - I loved that higher ranking Vampires listened and responded to lower ranks, rather than just ignore lower Characters like at other LARPs I've been to.

However, such interaction with the picture was minimal, and 'reading' into the picture by those with psychic means was limited to less than a handful of Characters. Whilst I know that this could be what the players have set-up or decided, I feel referees need to understand that other means need to be put in too so other players have something fair to play with.

I was later informed that the LARP year for Camarilla Invictus was from about mid-year to mid-year when a major-combat event would overturn the plot ready for another year of plot.

Whilst this sounds great, there are a few minor flaws I've encountered with LARP when this is the plan:

• This is The Plan. Therefore, it's almost completely unavoidable and plot is specifically driven to reach such conclusions
• Event 1, start of the new year... and it's not when plot is restarted. Whilst this means little to me, it does mean I started half-way through the year, which seems at odds with the real-world. The start of the year IRL psychologically sets you up for new starts - hence my decision to look around, and apparently the same with some others that joined
• It also means some plots are pushed to one side, or delayed, specifically to reach the goal of separating the talky stuff. Again, I understand the reason for it... I just think there are better ways to do it

In another CP-like way, the plot was established from multiple angles, with various things going on behind the scenes. This might sound like a great idea; it's not as great as you think. Plot this way - if poorly managed, or abused - is set up to screw the players over, simply because if they go after one objective the other bits them in the arse. Players need to focus on simple goals, preferably in a sequence. If plot is radial the above way it needs to be so a group of players can tackle one, then then next (etc) - it could be these groups move from one to another to do it, but each ‘branch’ needs to be sequential.

I've said before that plot needs to be episodic with clear breaks. I've also said before that smaller goals need to clear and easily to meet. The reason for this is to establish a Chain of Success - so that players feel a little triumph each time to spur them on, rather than feeling getting nowhere - after all, there's a reason why games like Candy Crush, Temple Run that that ilk are so popular.

With Camarilla Invictus, from what I've seen, players usually feel they're getting somewhere because they can and often do directly influence the plot.

I just feel that - especially being E1 ('event one') of a year (IRL) - it needed a 'bang'. Granted, this might have seemed problematic to the new players, but I highly doubt it.

I feel there's a lot to be learned from Murder Mystery dinner games, specifically to this kind of game.

Rules-wise - OMG it's sooooooo much better than Mind's Eye! The rules are simpler; Calls are In Character... brilliant! I would say that the rules are still just a little too complicated, and could be made more dynamic, but as a system it works brilliant. I feel the Wikidot needs to clarification and tidying up - possibly summarising certain points.

My biggest concern rules-wise is that, like Mind’s Eye, it’s a direct translation from the tabletop system. It’s much more simple, smooth system, no card-tricks or rock-paper-scissors, but it seems all they’ve done is reduced it to Top Trumps. Players still needed Character sheets and many kept pulling them out of their pocket during play. Table Top conversion to LARP never works out well… maybe in this instance as it’s been going 20 years? Even so, I think the system must run into real difficulties sometimes, and I reckon it can be simplified even more to improve playability.

Would I go again? To be fair, for me, the above points are minor compared to what I've experienced in the past, and the slow game was a great re-introduction to LARP. I thoroughly enjoyed myself and I'm already planning my next Vampire. I think I'd like to see some changes were I to play long-term, however, so the issued aren't entirely closed for me.


Do try it though - you'll love it!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I have to add that I honestly think that the nWoD would actually be a better setting that cWoD for LARP, and especially this group. cWoD is most definitely a 'Gothic-punk' setting in that it is just that - bland, drivel-lead pseudo-goth emo-ness. It's a story system in that you tell a tale... but that's it.

nWoD is, as the White Wolf Wikia describes, much closer to the theme they originally intended. The new setting 'humanises' characters more, gives them more of a direction, aim and personality. By adding beliefs, virtues and vices, nWoD focuses the experience of the game on the individual rather than the group - causing a more 'meaningful' experience for the players. As a games titled 'darkness' this is much better for Vampire players, allowing them to explore their own person horrors and limits.

Don't get me wrong, I have my issues with some of the nWoD stuff (combat and the God Machine stuff... explored in another post) but the newer setting is definitely far more rich and involving.

I really don't understand this cling to the past attitude - you enjoyed cWoD? Great. Good for you.... Times change? Get over it? I dunno... maybe it because most of the RPGers I meet that play cWoD over nWoD haven't actually looked at nWoD - or they have, briefly - or they have but haven't played - or they've played a couple of games... rather than actually giving it a try...

And for the record, I actually think that 1920's (Arkham style?), Victorian or possibly even Regency period would be much better settings to explore... Imagine the potential...