When LARP Goes Right: The Catharsis of Generous Play

I’ve been musing for a while on what to write, not merely because I have so much I want to talk about, get out of my system (the vile I have for bad attitudes burns – and as we all know, it can come out in horrific ways; I want to use this blog as a way of exorcising it), praise, bemoan and rejoice at.

To be honest, I sometimes feel that no one would want to hear my thoughts in any case, as my posts and thoughts tend to be of a critical nature – I feel I must point out that this I think is just my nature; I’m an analyser. Some people don’t start or do anything for fear of failure or success. I, on the other hand, tend to do and then look back and be critical. I’m as highly critical of myself as I am of others.

So people tend to see this as a bad thing as I’m “always moaning” or “never happy” or “think that other people are stupid” – all of which are as far from the truth as possible. If anything, the biggest reason behind my social anxiety is self-criticism. It’s as much my problem as it is yours.

The thing is, I see it as a positive thing. Without feedback, without criticism, we do not improve. We don’t grow and change. If it weren’t for a dramatic change in circumstance, we would never change. I have always been, and will always be, open to criticism and debate, open to changing my mind and seeing another perspective – as someone that places an emphasis on science in life, on evidence and logic, there can be nothing grander than emulating scientific thought, constantly re-evaluating and determining a new resolution if the evidence or logic shows me as wrong.

For this reason, yes, I do point out flaws where I see them and they affect me, friends, family – even people I don’t know when I see racism, homophobia, misogyny. Without this, how will things get better?

But this month, we’re going to move away from the gloom – into the realms of what goes right.

My local LARP is Player versus Player. I get the impression most players wouldn’t want PvP (especially in the UK?) as LARP has a seriously bad reputation for back-stabbing, bitching, griefing and down-right abusiveness. There’s a reason for that – because it does happen, A LOT, and LARP as a whole tends to neglect its responsibility to eliminate these things. I mean, com’on – even Empire has decidedly moved away from at least physical PvP

Worse, I would say LARP as a community specifically enables such behaviour and to a degree encourages it. I will happily present my thoughts to people that would argue otherwise or wish to hear my reasoning. I will also happily suggest ways this situation may be changed – I might not be totally right on all my ideas, but I know none of them are wrong.

I found this post a while ago by Mirror’s Song: In defence of PvP at larp

I’m thinking it’s a bit ridiculous that PvP needs to be defended, on three grounds:

• If you don’t like PvP, don’t play it
• PvP can be fun – the problem is therefore decidedly NOT PvP that is the problem, but the way people approach it
• Remember, play to have fun – no matter whether you PvP, PvE or anything else, if you focus on the fun, why would it turn nasty? If you’re not playing to have fun and bring fun to others, you don’t deserve to be playing in the first place

I can totally understand why some people get upset with In Character conflict at a LARP, and I can also get that some people feel upset when their character dies and the one person they thought would help them, won’t – or worse (shock! Horror!) is the person behind it!

The problem is that the person being upset knew they were walking into a PvP situation, and didn’t get any fun out of it. Why? Did they want to win and got upset about being wrong? Maybe they suffered a set-back they thought was unfair?

These issues need to be talked to with the referees, who need to give a clear, concise response – preferably in writing so that when questioned they can show others: “see? This is what happened”. It’s especially true for referees and game organisers – because then, if they’re wrong, you can point out to them where they went wrong and why, and they can then respond to it properly and maturely.

As you see, this also links back to my earlier paragraphs about criticism and feedback.

The biggest problem with any game, I think, is when the goals and aims of players to organisers, organisers to players and players to players don’t match (not necessarily ‘disagree’) – are you creating stories, or gunning for achievements?

I think this needs to be stated by the game organisers as a guideline: creating stories means weakening someone rather than outright destroying them as this weaves interesting drama. Gunning for achievement would require you to destroy them, so they don’t overtake you again.

I think for my local LARP the first instance is better, even preferable because there’ always a way back, if you want it. You just have to be willing to fight hard enough – that and the drama is fun! People pointed out to me on my 3^rd game or so that when another player kills your character it can be quite fun because it creates a story that is emotional. Last time I talked PvP I mentioned the execution.

One player mentioned to me that’s is actually more fun when you get killed by a friend. This is brilliantly true – you walk over to them, shake their hand and say “well done, mate. Nice one. Glad it was you” and that it’s been a good game of chess between you because you wove a drama together.

Your IC should never affect your OOC – so why the hell does PvP need to be “defended?”

At the last game I saw proof of it: two characters got so angry at one another there was shouting, bloodshed and one stormed away in anger. That player later approached his rival and said “excellent, dude, loved it. Good role-play”.

The thing is, the player that was telling me it’s better to die from a friend? Yeah, he used to play at the LARP I used to run.

I remember that once, his character was possessed by a powerful spirit that made his say vile things to the other characters – verbal violence as his brief was “short of actually harming them”. I remember that a few players got really pissed at him for this – they were taking IC to OOC – even my referees were saying he was showing his “true colours” by his behaviour. I defended him, stating the IC =/= OOC principle; eventually I gave up arguing, and he was later asked not to return after numerous incidents where grew increasingly agitated at the game, me and my refs.

I totally understand his position in this, and I admit I failed him: I should have argued more on his behalf and put my voice to his, giving him a chance to speak out. To be honest, my game should have ended there – my referees were clearly corrupt enough to spoil the game for people they didn’t like. People, that, professionally speaking, they shouldn’t have opinions over.

I’ve heard before that people say that LARP can be cathartic and healing for the soul. In 12 years of gaming I cannot say that is true. But I can say I experienced it at my local game at the last day event.

Before, LARP for me was CP, once LT and a couple of others. Those LARPs are competitive, achievement-based games – PvP in these games can certainly be aggressive, harsh, and players can easily get upset with it because it can be quite cold and uncaring. My referees and other players came from such games, too – it’s easy to see why they didn’t feel comfortable with PvP in my game.

It’s also because of this that I’ve come to realise I’ve never been too comfortable at LARP; it’s always been competitive, and the back-stabbing and bitching just made it worse. Competition can be great, but it only takes a bitch to make it unfair and miserable.

I finally understood the healing at the last game. You know there’s others out to get you, you know there’s conflict and schemes – but you also know you have friends.

I realised my character has friends IC with character played by people that I don’t speak to often OOC. I realised that OOC I have friends that support by brattish ways IC (I’m sure Michael will forgive me at some point!) and I realised I have friends that I could argue with, be annoyed at, kill and betray IC and we’d still be friends afterwards OOC. This sense helped be relax a great deal: I realised I have friends – on either IC and OOC sides – specifically because we help each other to have fun through telling stories. Friends that see the drama (say it in your campest voice!) of IC, not the bitching of OOC, friends that want everyone – me, you, themselves – to have fun, and not purely out to “do one better” and “screw over the other guy” in the process.

This, then, is the catharsis.

One of the biggest problems in any RPG game played in a group is when there’s a conflict on the perception on the nature of the game, or where goals conflict. This is, sometimes, down to a certain player or group of players having different goals from others, creating conflict – mostly caused because that player is trying to “get one over” on others, to “screw the other guy over” – it’s easy to see how this bleeds from IC to OOC.

It’s partly because the group members don’t listen to one another, treat each other with respect. And don’t say “respect is earned, not given”. Bollocks. We all deserve a certain amount of respect, because we’re all people, with feelings and emotions all that jazz.

But it’s mainly because there’s a difference of opinion on sharing fun – when the goal is less or more than simply about being fun.

But isn’t that what we play games for? To have fun?

When that’s the case, catharsis begins.

Even in PvP.

How to Complain – A Guide for LARPers

Perhaps the worst thing about LARP is the bitching and back-biting. It’s not the ‘drama’ – the playground, school-kid ‘I’m not talking to her because of what they said about our Sharon’ – that’s just fall-out.

No, the worst thing is what causes it. The rumour-mongering, fear-spreading, lie-creating, poisoning that seems to be accepted as part of the community.

I can see somewhat why this exists – though I probably am going to have to refer to stereotyping and generalisation to do it. Why? Because some people really think that because they fit into box labelled ‘X’, therefore they should also conform to the perception of ‘X’.

LARP doesn't have a forensic system of analysis, nor structure for policing itself. Indeed, many LARPs don't have any any form of conflict resolution other than "someone's done bad, uh... ban them, uhuh-huh...."

Take this example from Profound Decisions (of all people...):

Yes, they will warn you, and can potentially ban you, based on hearsay. That's disgusting - it's downright abusive.

But when all you can rely on is word-of-mouth, it's not surprising. But it does mean it's open to abuse, and that's exactly what I've known to have happened before.

I happened to my old game, when I banned a person for 1 Event - well, I say 'ban', I mean 'gardening leave' - it was an issues of possible Conflict of Interest. Without going into detail, the guy bitched about it over Facebook - and had overy 50 comments, most along the lines of:

"I don't know what this is about, but yeah, fuck that system, they're cunts!"

Way to go judging something when you have no details whatsoever.

Dafuq? We wouldn’t give the time of day to these kinds of pathetic remarks at any other time. In our daily lives, someone bitches or moans, you carry on as usual. Why on earth do we give such weight to these drama queens?

To be fair, I think the bitchy types are a very, very small portion of the LARP community that unfortunately many people pay attention to. What isn’t justified, however, is exactly how much influence these people have.

For some reason, LARP as a community not only accepts these people, it actively embraces them.

We’ve been fooled into thinking that, because you’re always going to get bitches and bitching, therefore it’s ok. I was actually told by a few group members of a local LARP that, as a referee, you shouldn’t confront people that you know to be bitching, or independent people have told you are bitching, simply because “you’re always going to get them”.

So….

That makes it ok then, yeah?

Of course not.

Bitching is a degrading process, like wind erosion or mould. It doesn’t change someone’s mind now… but it does eventually. It wears a persons’ perceptions thin, twists ‘truthiness’ to appear as the bitch wanted.

Talking with my mum about this recently, she told me that “people who believe the bitching about you, weren’t really friends to begin with”.

I don’t think that’s true. I think their opinion was changed over time by more than one individual – thereby, the ‘stories’ seem to corroborate, and therefore must be true. Past incidents get twisted to appear different in hindsight.

So, I’m asking for every LARP participant to do the following:

•  When you hear someone complain about the game, game staff, or another player, tell them that you’re not interested, it’s nothing to do with you!
• Stop asking for opinions on a game, game staff or another player – especially if you might not like the answer! The number of times someone’s got upset about an opinion…

 Oh my… the times someone’s reacted to something ‘offensive’!

I was once asked my opinion on a local LARP that the person asking me used to attend. I’d been to maybe 6 Day Events. My opinion of the game was rather dim – I hated the game, I hated the man that ran it, I hated the set-up, the design, the rules. To me, it was a shit game – it does nothing but upset its players, made them feel worthless and cheat everyone that it came into contact with.

The person asking was so offended! How dare I give such a bad opinion of ‘their’ game!? I surely must be such an arsehole to say such things! Um, no, love… you asked for my opinion. I gave it. If you didn’t want to accept what I had to say, you shouldn’t have asked. I was later told by my referee team that I shouldn’t be giving opinions on other LARPs as a LARP organiser myself – because then it was ‘bitching’. Huh? I was asked. I gave an answer – you know what the answer changes?

Nothing.

I wasn’t spreading lies or rumours; I wasn’t attacking the game or its creator. But I did give my reasons why the game was so poor, and that’s what these people didn’t want to hear – so clearly, I was being manipulative.

You have a problem with some aspect of the game? Do exactly the same as what’s acceptable in Real Life. Here’s what you should do: 

1.      Remember the difference between ‘feedback’ and ‘review’

·         Feedback is given directly to the Game Team. Not to anyone else. It should consist of:

·   What the game did well

·   What the game did poorly

·   What the game should improve on

·         Reviews are opinions in the public eye that share experiences. They should cover:

·   What you liked

·   What you didn’t – and why

·   An attempt to be non-biased despite coming from subjective experience

·   Your overall rating of the game

2.      Complain in person directly to a lead referee. They should take notes, and pass the complaint back to the Direction Team. Referees should be truly interested in your complaint, review, feedback and what you have to say – otherwise their game will not improve. Have a friend come with you, or do it for you if you would struggle with this confrontation

3.      If this doesn’t work, take it higher. Write a letter to the Direction Team, expressing your issues. The same applies here – you should expect a well-reasoned, informative response. Your issue should be taken on board as constructive feedback. Bear in mind that:

·         If you’re rude, coming from opinion only, or aggressive, prepare to be ignored entirely. No one should suffer abuse for your crusade

4.      If this still doesn’t work, write an open letter. Take it to Twitter and Facebook. Go public. You’ll get a response pretty quickly then! Bear in mind that:

·         This is poor way to do it when a simple, polite word would have solved it first. It’s also poor form in general – it should make you look bad too. But if you can show you’ve at least made a polite attempt first…

5.      If this doesn’t work, stop playing that game. The game clearly isn’t interested in you – so why should you support it with your time and money?

I must say, I’m really shocked – still! – that there isn’t a (possibly) anonymous Review site that give reviews of LARP games so we can see what the game is actually like, rather than hearing third-hand bitching.

There’s a better, healthier way to do it.

Let’s start remembering that, and reminding others.

  

Summary:

You don’t like something in a game, don’t tell your friends. Don’t tell the newbies. Don’t go out of your to spew your hate over bystanders.

• ‘feedback’ and ‘review’
• Complain in person
• Write a polite letter to the Direction Team
• If this still doesn’t work, write an open letter
• If this doesn’t work, stop playing that game

Simples.

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...