essentialsaltes (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
essentialsaltes) wrote2012-05-27 04:33 pm
essentialsaltes) wrote2012-05-27 04:33 pm
Maxicon XII
Once again I announce: "All hail ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
popepat!" And Mrs. Pope and Minipope. They once again opened up their house for (can it be?) the 12th Maxicon (which is still ongoing, but I moderated my participation to Saturday only... stretching into Sunday).
First up for me was Garrett's Dead Space RPG. I had played the demo, which made me the most knowledgeable about the source material I think. Which is not a problem, since the whole point is to scare the pants off you with the unexpected. It went well: fast-paced, high tension, limited resources, stressful timing deadlines. If there was any problem, it was that the gods of luck smiled on us too much in the final showdown. Good scary fun.
Next up,aaronjv ran The Tribunal, an award-winning LARP created by jiituomas. The 12 players play soldiers in a totalitarian state, faced with a difficult decision: whether to value honesty over expediency. I'm torn about how much I should or shouldn't reveal. One part of me says it doesn't matter since whatever happens is almost entirely the product of the players; the other part says that hearing the rationalizations or bullshit produced by one set of players might affect future players who read about it, and thus color whatever they would ultimately produce. I'll err on the side of caution and step back a bit.
I enjoyed the experience. This is perhaps controversial. Some people (named Aaron) have denigrated the idea that LARP is merely (?) an enjoyable pastime. It is Art with a capital A. I don't have a problem with that, except that in its extreme form Art becomes Pollock and Rothko. You're a rube if you expect to enjoy it, it's Art fer crissakes. Art!
I had my doubts about whether I would enjoy being an ant in a totalitarian army. But I came in to the game with not only an open mind, but a willingness and readiness to do it right. And the other participants probably saw me red-faced and shouting more in those couple hours than in the rest of their experience of me. Anyway, my awesome role-playing (relatively speaking) is beside the point; the point is that I enjoyed the experience. But am I supposed to enjoy my Brussels Sprouts?
My answer is that I don't care. LARP for me is an enjoyable pastime, and as long as I enjoy it I will continue to participate. It may also be Art; it may also be therapy; it may also be escapism; I don't care: Philistine that I am, I'm only interested in doing it if I enjoy it.
Anyway, stepping back in. I liked the way that character names instantly invoked associations that helped to establish character, and aided others in remembering same. I liked the way that the game was essentially entirely created by the players rather than directed from outside. The game relies on the players being willing to play, and I'm glad we had a group up to the challenge.
Following that was an impromptu meeting of the Live Game Labs & other interested parties, wherein we plotted the future of American LARP while simultaneously solving the problem of monetizing LARP and trading juicy gossip.
popepat!" And Mrs. Pope and Minipope. They once again opened up their house for (can it be?) the 12th Maxicon (which is still ongoing, but I moderated my participation to Saturday only... stretching into Sunday).First up for me was Garrett's Dead Space RPG. I had played the demo, which made me the most knowledgeable about the source material I think. Which is not a problem, since the whole point is to scare the pants off you with the unexpected. It went well: fast-paced, high tension, limited resources, stressful timing deadlines. If there was any problem, it was that the gods of luck smiled on us too much in the final showdown. Good scary fun.
Next up,
aaronjv ran The Tribunal, an award-winning LARP created by jiituomas. The 12 players play soldiers in a totalitarian state, faced with a difficult decision: whether to value honesty over expediency. I'm torn about how much I should or shouldn't reveal. One part of me says it doesn't matter since whatever happens is almost entirely the product of the players; the other part says that hearing the rationalizations or bullshit produced by one set of players might affect future players who read about it, and thus color whatever they would ultimately produce. I'll err on the side of caution and step back a bit.I enjoyed the experience. This is perhaps controversial. Some people (named Aaron) have denigrated the idea that LARP is merely (?) an enjoyable pastime. It is Art with a capital A. I don't have a problem with that, except that in its extreme form Art becomes Pollock and Rothko. You're a rube if you expect to enjoy it, it's Art fer crissakes. Art!
I had my doubts about whether I would enjoy being an ant in a totalitarian army. But I came in to the game with not only an open mind, but a willingness and readiness to do it right. And the other participants probably saw me red-faced and shouting more in those couple hours than in the rest of their experience of me. Anyway, my awesome role-playing (relatively speaking) is beside the point; the point is that I enjoyed the experience. But am I supposed to enjoy my Brussels Sprouts?
My answer is that I don't care. LARP for me is an enjoyable pastime, and as long as I enjoy it I will continue to participate. It may also be Art; it may also be therapy; it may also be escapism; I don't care: Philistine that I am, I'm only interested in doing it if I enjoy it.
Anyway, stepping back in. I liked the way that character names instantly invoked associations that helped to establish character, and aided others in remembering same. I liked the way that the game was essentially entirely created by the players rather than directed from outside. The game relies on the players being willing to play, and I'm glad we had a group up to the challenge.
Following that was an impromptu meeting of the Live Game Labs & other interested parties, wherein we plotted the future of American LARP while simultaneously solving the problem of monetizing LARP and trading juicy gossip.
no subject
*steels self to click the links*
WHOA, NELLY!
Um, yeah. I'm all for pushing some boundaries - with mutual consent all 'round and stuff - but goodness me. That just goes way beyond anything I'd want to do for fun. And, indeed, far beyond anything I'd consider in the realm of good taste.
(Yeah, yeah, art doesn't have to be tasteful, but whether I treat it as performance art or momentary diversion, my first rule of LARPing is "Always have fun", so...)
no subject
My main one is "What is fun?"
Fun for whom? The GMs? All players?
What is fun for me might not be fun for you. Also, I don't think the purpose of all larps is to have fun. For example, I started a company that uses larp for education. The primary purpose is to teach, NOT to have fun. Do we want fun games? Yes, but that is not the primary rule. Same, too, with the military larps.
Anyway, much more to say on this topic. Also, on Gang Rape and Fat Man Down larps: the titles alone scare people off and they won't look at what they are. Gang Rape was written to examine how the rape laws in Denmark (think it was Denmark) are very lax, with a heavy burden on the victim to prove that there was a crime. It was written to incite political action AGAINST the laws regarding the crime.
and....oh well, have to eat dinner
no subject
Also, subscribe to Playground magazine (http://playgroundroleplayingmagazine.wordpress.com/) for more articles about larping.
no subject
no subject
But a player can generally articulate what is fun for them and, based on a game's writeup, judge whether or not an event will provide whatever kind of enjoyment they're looking for. Similarly, a GM with their act together will choose carefully as to what sort of event to run at what sort of venue.
Mind you "What does a GM get out of running a game" is no doubt subject for thousands and thousands of words.
no subject
Right, absolutely. I think I am one of the few people in America deranged enough to consider my golden rule of larp to be "Take it seriously and give it your all." Whether that's as a player or a GM, whether it's larp for entertainment or education, to change the world or to change yourself. But I have yet to find someone in the States who doesn't think that the purpose of larp is to have fun, whatever "fun" is. What if "having fun" means making sure everyone else does NOT have fun?
As to "what a GM gets out of running a game", that hasn't been explored much to my knowledge. I know Rob McDiarmid wrote an essay on the motivations of players, and that has been discussed a lot, but rarely are the intents of the GMs. Would you be interested in writing an essay on that topic for an academic book I am going to edit for later this year? Or, if not for that, for Playground? (No pay on either one, alas.)
The main point I make in larps is "full disclosure", that is, let everyone know what the social contract is between GM and players. The type of game and intentions should be clear from the GM, and, ideally, what players are going to bring to the table should be understood. For example, when I ran "The Tribunal" that Mike talks about, I asked that they take it seriously. This worked well, as there was very little humor in the game, and, with a bunch of nerds, it's almost impossible for them to refrain from the MST3K commentary, yet they did. Expectations were set and met.
One of the new debates in the Nordic larps is the term "alibi". For Gang Rape, all players will have read the rules and voluntarily agree to them. They go in as willing participants. In Fat Man Down, however, there's a GM that alters some things, asking the players to do things they may not want to do. In some circles, Fat Man Down has alibi--"The GM made me do it"--which allows for a deeper experience. They suggest, I think, that anyone who agrees to participate in Gang Rape is a sick, twisted individual. But isn't it worse when you place responsibility (and blame) for your actions on someone else, as you do in Fat Man Down? Personally, I feel that Fat Man Down is a worse, darker larp than Gang Rape. That all being said, I don't know if I could participate in either. But I love to bring them up as a thought exercise.
My main point to American audiences is that I think both of those are larps are not fun. But they are still larps. And depending on your definition of good/bad, I won't say that they are "bad" larps. They are daring and provocative and controversial, and they are also well-constructed. I disagree with Mike, I don't think they are bad larps, I think they are dangerous larps. That's not the same thing. The Stanford Prison Experience is a "good" larp in terms of design and production, but it's a dangerous larp.
And realizing that larps can be dangerous begins to recognize the power of live action role playing has. It moves it out of the realm of hobby into art, which is how I would like it to be.
no subject
"Take it seriously and give it your all." - I'm surprised you think you're in the minority with that mantra. For me, it's more like something that's so built into the process that it's a given. A pack of strangers are counting on you for several hours of *something* - if you're not going to take it seriously, gtfo, y'know? I've not yet met a (successful) GM who didn't work by that philosophy...
re: throwing some words together for you, I'd have to have a think about that to see if I've got anything honestly meaningful to say. Most of my LARP writings have been pretty light and basic stuff, possibly too light for your intended audience.
Interesting point re: social contract between GM and players. Again, I see it touched on in a lighter way in most events I've participated in/ran - terms ranging from the GM agreeing to provide a coherent event to the players agreeing to not touch each other without mutual consent, etc. Again, I've touched on it a *bit* on my LARP page in GM and Player Responsibilities to a LARP (again, at the link, above)
I agree with the idea that a LARP can be emotionally intense and not fit the definition of "good" but can still be "fun" for the participant - but that brings us right back to what the meaning of "fun" is.
(resists temptation to draw parallels to the kink scene and how one masochist's idea of a hell of an afternoon probably violates some tenets of the Geneva convention and therefore could hardly be considered "fun" in the traditional sense of the word...)
My *specific* objection to the event "Gang Rape" is borne of several factors, not the least of which being the danger to the participants' mental health. But I'll save the rest of that for my own soapbox.
I suppose part of the resistance/reaction you see to the proposal of terming a larp as art is borne of intimidation. Anyone can be a hobbyist. Not everyone can be an artist.
I've been trying to parlay 15+ years of LARP running into some employable skills (I know, good luck!) and I know that even the term "role playing" makes some recruiters shudder, so I've resorted to using the term "Interactive Fiction". So far, it seems to work...
Going to go check out some of the links you've posted here and there. Cheers.
no subject
No way, I love this. It's almost as though LJ were relevant again!
no subject
I think I am in the minority with that mantra because "Always have fun" is not my #1 rule. In other words, I'm not saying I don't want to have fun when I run/play larps, it's not my #1 goal. And from the anecdotal comments I get from almost all Americans, that IS the #1 goal of larpers, to have fun. Do they want to give it their all? Yes, I suspect many do, most of the time. But "fun" is not the #1 goal for everything I play/run. Again, my example is the edu-larp I am running right now (next session is tomorrow). My goal is not to have fun. I am having fun, but that's not why I am doing this. I am doing this because I want these at-risk, low-income high schoolers to develop an appreciation for and basic understanding of the usefulness of mathematics. It was made very clear to me by Christian Brown, a founder/designer, that "We can make fun games. That's easy. But can we teach using these games?" And the teaching part is more important than the fun part. If the players (students) learn but are bored, we win. If they have fun but learn nothing, we lose. Most likely, though, they will have fun and learn, or learn because they are having fun.
That's why I think I am in the minority, because not all my larps follow the Golden Rule that you stated: "Always have fun."
re: throwing some words together for you, I'd have to have a think about that to see if I've got anything honestly meaningful to say. Most of my LARP writings have been pretty light and basic stuff, possibly too light for your intended audience.
Who is my intended audience? YOU ARE. The fact that you're even writing about larp in a serious way is interesting, since there's so little of it in America. I'll look over your articles (thank you for the link), but I am still interested in getting essays. Some of it will be hard core academia, but not all of it.
(resists temptation to draw parallels to the kink scene and how one masochist's idea of a hell of an afternoon probably violates some tenets of the Geneva convention and therefore could hardly be considered "fun" in the traditional sense of the word...)
Great analogy, actually, you should draw parallels between the kink scene and larping. I didn't get into it in my essay, but I believe that a sexual RP scene is larping. I also believe that certain religious ceremonies touch on larping as well. But my intellectual muscles aren't buffed enough to take those weights on. However, the Nordic larpers do, and I can probably track down some of those essays. I know Molly Rapp did a college paper on religion in larp, interviewing both me and essentialsaltes. We have it around here somewhere...
My *specific* objection to the event "Gang Rape" is borne of several factors, not the least of which being the danger to the participants' mental health. But I'll save the rest of that for my own soapbox.
I'm not saying that GR is a good larp, or something that everyone should play. I doubt I could do it myself (and I have read the rules and know that I wouldn't be physically touched, nor touch anyone at all, except probably a hug after it was over). There's a psychodrama larp called "Forbidden Fruit" by Nathan Hook in The Green Book (http://www.lulu.com/shop/nathan-hook/the-green-book/paperback/product-15063841.html) that I doubt I could play, either.
My point is that not all larps are designed to be fun, but they are still larps. Thus, when I read that "the Golden Rule of larp is to have fun" (and I hear/read similar sentiments often), I have to beg to differ.
cont...
Anyone can be a hobbyist. Not everyone can be an artist.
Yes, exactly I had this discussion somewhere (the LARP Academia list (http://mortalisrpg.com/mailman/listinfo/larpacademia_mortalisrpg.com), maybe?). I don't have a problem with larp as hobby, or hobbyists in larp. It's when they declare that ALL LARP IS A HOBBY. I call larp art so I can get grant funding. The term helps me understand it better. But yes, the example that came up is that Thomas Keller (a chef) might make up some games to play with his kids. Shigeru Miyamoto (a video game designer) might cook some meals at night to feed his family. To video games, Thomas is a hobbyist, Miyamoto is an artist. To cooking, Shigeru is a hobbyist, Kellers is an artist. At least, that's how I understand and approach it. I have learned to stop worrying and learned to love larp hobbyists. ;-)
I've been trying to parlay 15+ years of LARP running into some employable skills (I know, good luck!) and I know that even the term "role playing" makes some recruiters shudder, so I've resorted to using the term "Interactive Fiction".
I use the word larp on my resume, and to recruiters, and I am going to continue doing so. I also started a company that designs larps for education. And I am looking to get paid for my 25 years of larp experience. Maybe in a year or so I can hire you. ;-)
One more link for you, I just started watching Tobias Wrigstad's Game Lecture here (http://vimeo.com/10030923). A lot of what he is saying is directly relevant to this conversation.
no subject
When it comes to that last point, I'm reminded of a quote by, god help me, Robert Heinlein that ran something along the lines of "Satisfaction lies in being allowed to put in many hours working hard on something you find fulfilling." I often find the work I put into a LARP (as a GM or as a player) very fulfilling and so thus it is also, in my personal lexicon, fun. So I stand by the notion that the first rule is "Have fun", but with the caveat that the definition of "fun" can vary wildly from person to person.
There's also the inescapable fact that you're building a career on interactive gaming and so have that - I'm guessing - very much at the forefront of your mind. Of course that is going to have a massive impact on how you perceive LARP, how you present it, and why. Duly noted and all that.
As for drawing parallels between kink and LARP, I'm hesitant for several reasons - not the least of which being I only just *got away* from gamers who seemed to treat LARPs as a BDSM-lite space and, oh gods, that's not what I go to what-I-call-a-LARP *for*. If I wanted kink, there are plenty of better spaces and places I can visit... Again, I should save that for my own blog. ;)
no subject
Ditto the purpose of various LARPs - although I think one can be forgiven for using the term in the most common sense of the word. Most gamers, in my experience, aren't thinking of educational events or military exercises when I say "LARP".
That said, I still would regard the extreme LARPs mentioned in The Positive Negative Experience of Extreme Roleplaying* with utmost wariness.
*Yes, I read through the whole thing, so I had more than just the title to go on regarding "Gang Rape". It still struck me as shudderingly unpleasant and potentially unsafe.
no subject
The Great Player Safety Controversy Panel
Fri 15.00 – Fri 16.30, Auditorium, Panel
Organizers: Johanna Koljonen, Bjarke Pedersen, Jaakko Stenros
Playing close to home, grownup gaming, thin characters, interaction alibis, defucking for bleed… In the last few years the Nordic design community has made giant leaps in game intensity, particularly by systematically steering players towards using personal and painful experiences as in-game intensifiers. New words, phrases and concepts relating to player safety have popped up too, signaling the need for a serious conversation on risks and responsibilities. While the games are very cool, they also throw all of our old ideas of player safety out the window (and reveal that many we used to trust never actually worked at all).
How do these games affect us? To what extent can larpmakers be absolved of responsibility if a player gets broken? Can a player – especially a new player – ever have a realistic idea of what the larp experience will entail? Is it even ethical to invite people with no larp experience to play extreme games?
This panel brings together some of the people giving separate talks on safety and ethics at Solmukohta for a spirited overview of what, if anything, we as a community know about taking care of each other before, during and after larps designed for extreme experiences. A premise of the conversation is that grown-ups should generally speaking be allowed to make dangerous or destructive choices for themselves within the limits of the law. Nobody is looking to outlaw extreme experiences – but we should be able to have a sane conversation about designing parameters around them.
no subject
I must admit that if I want an experience using personal and painful experiences as in-game intensifiers, then I'd just get more serious about being an actor, cos that's almost directly out of the Stanislavsky/Meissner playbook. ;)
no subject
But is that what you would tell others? What about larp as therapy?
I know for most people, extreme larp isn't for them. That's fine. Also, most people think larp is fantasy-boffer campaigns, and that's what they want. That's fine. But I want something else, and I can't get it here in SoCal unless I run it myself. That bothers me, so I rant. If I want to use a personal and painful experience as an in-game modifier, I don't want someone telling me to "be an actor."
In my mind, the difference between larp and theater is the audience. The purpose of an actor is to evoke an emotional response in the audience. It doesn't matter if the actor feels that emotion or not (method), it matters if they can get the audience to feel it. If the actor needs to feel that emotion to be able to project it to the audience, so be it, but it's not required. And if I remember my acting classes correctly, the original Stanislavsky method was NOT what became method acting and "channeling your inner pain" into your character.
In larp, I think, it's about the internal, the personal. It's about what YOU, the player are feeling and experiencing, not what you are evoking in others. And that gets back to the "fun" question: I had great fun playing a fire mage fresh out of magic school in a boffer larp. I got drunk celebrating and ended up fireballing all the PCs in the game. They almost killed me. I then spent the next hour bawling (fer reals) in the tavern that I made this huge mistake, that I'm no good, that I hurt innocents, etc. That was fun for me, but PvP isn't fun for others, and they don't like being attacked by another player.
But that shows what larp is all about: it's selfish. It's what *I* wanted to do and explore as a character, not making sure the other players had a good time. It's not the emotions I evoked in the other players, it's the emotions I invoked in myself. That, to me, is how I separate larp and traditional theater.
Another discussion I have had with K is NPC vs PC. Are NPCs just foils for the PCs? Is the purpose of an NPC to evoke in the PCs? (this is the kind of stuff I talk about almost nightly with my wife)
no subject
I wouldn't call that a LARP.
And then, inevitably, we are sucked into arguing about what is and isn't a LARP. I know that you've got your own definition by which, something like a therapeutic exercise does indeed qualify. But that doesn't necessarily match *my* definition. But let's not go there in this format, we'll end up chasing our tails at best and bickering at worst. ;)
(Stanislavsky was about using imagination to create a plausible performance, yes - but Meissner et al wouldn't exist without him and find me an actor that doesn't rely on the techniques of the 20th century pioneers in acting... but I digress. My acting, she is rusty.)
And it seems that I have a more collaborative (maybe not the best word. Interactive? Dependent?) notion of what LARP is, for me - as, in my case, it's about what I do and experience *and* what I invoke in other PCs.
As for NPCs. When I run a game, they are there to help advance the plot, usually by providing information that would be otherwise impossible for the PCs to obtain. In general, though, I try not to use them, because too many players use the 'meta' approach of "Aha! An NPC! They must be important! Therefore, I shall hang around them and hope the plot rubs off on me, regardless of my effort and regardless of whether or not it makes any sense for me to be in that NPC's vicinity in the first place." But that's a rant I'll save for my own journal.
I loved talking this stuff up with my (late) husband, but he tended to roll his eyes a lot. :)
no subject
Your first entry, "Why I larp" is great, because you are following a parallel track to me. We're going in the same direction, and I'm waving at you.
I wish we could have met at last Wyrd Con (or at all). Are you coming down for TriWyrd (June 21-24)?
Finally, I asked a question a while back on my LJ, or FB, I forget...about what someone's dream larp would be. Your comment as to no numerical stats is the same for me. I even ran a tabletop Cal of Cthulhu RPG campaign set in the Dreamlands, and I took the numbers away from the players. They still rolled dice, but all their stats and attributes were in text form. I have that long recap over at my LJ if you care to read. The first part explains that. (http://aaronjv.livejournal.com/533971.html)
I'm basically trying to encourage you to keep going in your exploration of larp. There are others on this path, and we are going somewhere good. :-D
no subject
*nod* I sensed that we're in the same neighborhood, but we're following different paths. No biggie. There's room enough for all of us.
no subject
Kickstarter you way down here via running a game there?
no subject
As it is, I'll be deploying the online begging bowl next week for things like rent and the phone bill, and even *that's* not assured of much success, because of the aforementioned drahmuh. Oh well.
no subject
no subject