Maxicon XII

[essentialsaltes]

Once again I announce: "All hail 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.

Comments

[ian-tiberius.livejournal.com]

I can only hope for the day when people ask what kind, or someone can say "I like fantasy larps" or "I like Nordic style" or whatever.

Yes, exactly.

Although one essay says its more pragmatic to pair larp with performance art instead of theater art.

That sounds right to me. I didn't mention it because I was already writing too much, but somewhere above you mentioned that the distinction between theater and LARP is that one is for an audience and the other is for the players. I'm not sure that's the sole difference, but I agree it's a key one.

Do you thus ignore your characters own goals so someone else can achieve theirs?

Quite the contrary.

For one thing, I don't equate achieving your character goals to enjoyment. But beyond that, I assume that the person running the LARP has made a careful effort to put players on different sides of issues and give them opposing goals. Players A and B want to elect X as mayor, while players C and D want to elect Y - for example. If I'm player A and I flake on pursuing my goal, then I'm not only screwing B who was probably counting on my help, but I've taken the challenge away from C and D. I choose to assume (even though it's often not true) that a LARP is a finely tuned machine that relies on me to make a reasonable effort to pursue my goals in order to keep everything ticking properly. (and if I do so and everything doesn't tick properly anyway, well at least it's not my fault.)

Anyway, when I said that I want to make sure that my role contributes to the experience that the other players are having, I was partially talking about this - making sure that the other players have the level of support and/or challenges that the GM intended - but I was also talking about role-playing. If the other players leave the game feeling that my role-playing enhanced the mood and contributed to the feeling of immersion, then I've done my job. (At more than one LARP where I've observed a low level of role-playing energy, I've taken it upon myself to really commit, and even though I'm the only one doing it, I'm hopefully giving the other players the idea that it's okay to put themselves out there and do likewise. It's surprising how often it works, at least a little bit.)

It seems like you are saying that only PvP games are games.

No, but I realize I left that unclear in my list of three elements, because I said "...player has goals to pursue which are not in perfect union with everyone else's" and did not clarify that "everyone" should be interpreted to mean "including the GM, or the computer, or for that matter a set of rules that constrain the player's ability to advance towards their goal."

A better way to put it, upon reflection, would be to say that there must be an antagonist whose purpose is to thwart players in their pursuit of their goals. That antagonist could be another player, or it could be the GM, or a set of rules, but there has to be something which offers one or more players a chance of failure.

(That antagonist may be partially friendly. For example, most GMs don't really want their players to fail. That said, if it's clear that the GM *will not let* the players fail no matter what they do, then I would say it has crossed over from "game" into "collaborative storytelling".)

[aaronjv.livejournal.com]

If you are at all interested---and no reason you should be---the essay I refer to is called "Larp, Theatre and Performance" by Marjukka Lampo, and is available for free in the "Think" book of Knutepunkt 2011, here (http://rollespilsakademiet.dk/kpbooks/).

I still believe that Final Girl is a game because there is a structure to it, rules of things we can and cannot do. Those rules are artificial, and there is a quantifiable goal: decide which character survives. The people are the randomizers, their role playing ability. Does it lie in the fuzzy realm between collaborative storytelling and game? Absolutely. But so, too, do many games. And those are usually the kinds of games/events I like. FWIW, I enjoyed Fiasco the most of the three indie RPGs I played (Final Girl and Geiger Counter being the other two).

If you missed it, I think this is an "is/ought" argument, that Mike has said. I think I am arguing what larp *is*, and you and the others were talking about what larp *ought* to be. In the long run, does that knowledge matter in us making or playing a good larp? It might not to you, but this knowledge and framework helps me. But for most others, they can probably go on participating in kick-ass larps without ever knowing what "bleed" is.

I forgot most of what my arguments were, and what yours started as, and I have other things to do (as I am sure you and everyone here has to do), but I'd love to debate this more, later, over beers.

[ian-tiberius.livejournal.com]

I still believe that Final Girl is a game because there is a structure to it, rules of things we can and cannot do. Those rules are artificial, and there is a quantifiable goal: decide which character survives. The people are the randomizers, their role playing ability. Does it lie in the fuzzy realm between collaborative storytelling and game? Absolutely.

It bears mentioning that I'm not claiming that the definition of "game" that I was using is the only valid one; hell, it's not even the only one that I'll use. If someone says "What did you do last Saturday?" I'm going to answer "Played some games," not "Some games plus a storytelling exercise."

The only reason I drew out all those distinctions is because you wanted to know what I meant when I said "there's no 'game' per se" to "Final Girl". And I see what you're saying, but if I wanted to be really technical about it I still say that when no player has a particular set goal and the mechanics don't really give you any option to protect "your" character anyway, that's a lot more like writing a script than playing chess. But I've said all I have to say about it and it's not like I'm going to fight anybody who uses a different definition.

I have yet to play Fiasco, though I'd very much like to. I am told that Final Girl is based on Geiger Counter, but I don't know if GC is more of a storytelling exercise in that sense or if it's more "game"-y. Either way, hopefully I'll have an opportunity to check it out at some point.

If you missed it, I think this is an "is/ought" argument

Hmm. Maybe. I think we've touched on a number of subjects - what the term "LARP" ought to encompass, where the distinction between "game" and "not a game" is drawn, and so forth. For the record, although I don't feel any need to impose my own definitions on others, I do feel that the discussion helps highlight the way different people think about the form. And some of the terminology being developed by the folks who take it seriously as an academic discipline can be useful - "bleed", for example, is a damned useful word for discussing LARP, once everyone understands what it means. Long story short, I completely agree that the knowledge and framework is helpful.

but I'd love to debate this more, later, over beers.

I've never yet said no to yakking about LARP over beer.