LARP Theories

[Clay Dreslough]

CJD: It would be nice to run a Quest Game sequel to CG4 (http://quest.org/events/gamelist.shtml) ("A Call To Arms"), but I think we'd really need to make it a one-shot to be able to properly experiment with the rules, plot and game world. Specifically:

1) Have all PCs with same points. No 45-point characters from the early 1990s.
2) Kill all the ****ing barkskins and do something about armor.
3) Do something like limit spell-casting to the start of combat (I'm still thinking about this).

JTM: "One shot in the CG world, feel free to bring your CG characters."

CJD: Regardless of the "plot" (time-travel, kill them all, etc.), I'm realizing the best way to write a game is start with experiences and build a framework around it. Instead of the old "write a plot then think of last-minute props or rules device [like shadow-faces and rock-paper-scissors] to fill out the meat of the experience.

JTM: And then contingency plan like a mofo. Giant upside down tree action.

CJD: Frex, it occurred to me today that a great scene is if some PCs get captured and chained up. Maybe to a big millstone like the kind they strap horses to. Every chain has a padlock that can be picked. And mages can cast spells to defeat the Grum or whoever captured them.

JM: **** yeah. I was thinking in the last game how exciting it would be to run across a gigantic mess of zombies all chained. Their wills broken. You think they're going to attack, but they're just working, toiling.

CJD: But the fighters have to take a backseat until they can get to their weapons. You maybe even start game design with the props.

JM: And work your way backward. That makes sense.

CJD: Like you have a meeting to build the big giant chest that the PCs will literally dig out of the ground, before you even know WHY they will be led to this.

JTM: Come up with lots of awesome gimmicks. Build a gigantic actual city by running fabric all across the girls' cabins such that it makes a giant roof.

CJD: Then you have 10 fun things you write a plot around.

JTM: Armor totally messes with things. It regenerates back to 2 hits after 5 mins!

CJD: In California, the games Dee and I ran had armor rules that SOUNDED imbalancing but totally weren't. Chainmail was IMPERVIOUS to slashing weapons on the areas it covered. No counting. No hit points.

JTM: So you just knew to battle around it. Which makes sense. I like people going down when they get hit.

CJD: So you see a guy with a chain shirt and you shoot arrows at him, send your mace guy on him, or a stabbing tip. Or just use spells.

JTM: Reward ingenuity a **** of a lot more. People just aren't ****ing ingenious anymore. They're expecting to go to the battles, etc. They no longer try to go around them. Also, I want to give the PCs SICK puzzles to solve. So non-combatant type people can get a serious advantage.

CJD: You mean how do you get them into an ingenious mood?

JTM: Right. That they know they will be rewarded for trying something non-conventional. Instead of being lulled by the story.

CJD: I think that's somewhat easy actually. You have to write a loosely plotted game where you NEVER "deus ex machina" anything and don't lead them by the nose.

JTM: I want to take and adapt puzzles from this: https://normalville.org/

CJD: I've been a PC at games and I think "hey, I should just run around this big battle and get the treasure". But then I think "I BET the GMs don't want me to do that". That's the #1 reason people aren't "ingenious".

CJD: With CTA (CG4) we tried to keep the PC/NPC ratio high because generally the PCs have a blast and the NPCs don't always. The game after all is FOR the PCs so have 30 PCs and 50 staff (ala otherworld) isn't my idea of a great time.

JTM: And as PCs die, they can join.

CJD: So CTA was like 8 NPCs and 50 PCs.

JTM: That's beautiful. I love that idea. It's efficient and can be fun. I think the proper teaser will get more old-timers out. And I want to bring a ton of new blood in.

CJD: In AG6 we spent all weekend running non-stop and it was essentially self-directed. We knew of treasures to get and we ran and got them. Small, timed encounters all over the camp keep the PCs broken up.

JTM: **** yes. And if one group is getting too much treasure, encourage people to take them out. Traps, puzzles, and boxes. Filled with potions and wands and things.

CJD: Party finds ogre body. Speak with dead: "The PARTY NAME killed me and they took my magic sword". Party responds: "S-h-i-t, WE wanted that magic sword!"

CJD: PC party comes to alchemist at 2:00. Alchemist says "the orgre lives at the lizard camp and has the Sword of Elven Power". Next party comes at 2:15 bribing him for a clue. He says the same thing. 2nd party gets there too late, but the NPC can stay dead for 15 minutes if you plan ahead.

JTM: I HATE THE RADIOS.

CJD: Yeah I ****ing HATED it when the radios were blaring RIGHT next to the PCs.

JTM: Two prep things I want to see done are: 1) Massive prop building with lots of people 2) People meet at least 3 times before the game in character and interact with each other in character for fun. Throw a party and everyone comes as their character.

CJD: But my other idea is get lore to the PCs a week ahead of time. I gotta go sleep altough this is fun.

JTM: Later.

[JimV]

A fascinating topic, as always ;-)


A few random notes:

"Do something like limit spell-casting to the start of combat (I'm still thinking about this)."

There's one way I've heard at least. John Raynor's idea was to switch from the D&D model to the actual medieval model. Spells are rituals, that take quite a bit of time between assembling components, summoning up spirits to do your bidding and so on. So basically all spells have casting times of minutes, not seconds and are Out-of-Combat activities.

"get lore to the PCs a week ahead of time"

Oh yes...this is stuff they should KNOW, not fumble through papers for, and give them a chance to explain their learning in a RP fashion. (though I also like the "Sundering" model of having book lore be rather obscure and take some thought to puzzle out.)

"CJD: You mean how do you get them into an ingenious mood?

JTM: Right. That they know they will be rewarded for trying something non-conventional. Instead of being lulled by the story."

Part of it is "don't penalize them off the bat for doing it. "Remember at Adventure 6, when Doty & Wasserman grabbed the elven Princess and disappeared into the deep woods? That was great! I can't imagine anyone today (but some of us maverick Old Timers) even considering it. GMs/Rules folks would slap 'em down in an instant. But that's not the whole story. I think some people just need a kick-start in thinking outside the box.

Casting spells across the lake? Still legal but I've not seen it done since Adv 7.
Simple stuff like just hiding under leaves? Works like a charm when my Wolven bushwack people at Otherworld but hardly ever see it at Quest.

Allowing/encouraging creative PC design. Not just back-story but actual mechanics. Letting GMs have the ability to approve things just for their game again would be a hge help rather than needing to run everything by committee.


Making part of the plot that requires ingenuity might help too. Like the monster that's immune to your weapons and attack spells may need to be approached in some other way.

Something that might also help is encouraging deep RP. Classic example -> at "The Hollows" ('95) James Gregory's assassin PC had been offed in the parking lot. Doty & I took turns fireman-carrying his limp body all the way back to our cabin so our cleric could heal & raise him. That visceral immersion would help a lot.

- It would be interesting to take a bunch of Really Cool Moments (that could feasibly be replicated anyway) that people liked from past games and see if some kind of coherent game could be formed from them.

- John says" People meet at least 3 times before the game in character and interact with each other in character for fun. Throw a party and everyone comes as their character."
We used to do this more - have "pre-game Taverns" that introduced the setting and got people involved in the plot ~2 weeks before the game so when Friday came they hit the ground running.
There have also been sporadic "Purely RP" gatherings. Not Official Quest events at all....just comes as a character & hobnob. Quite fun for actually getting in some RP without the distactions of combat & Mystery Solving.

- Upsetting the Paradigm is Fun. :-D
John Raynor & I used to brainstorm constantly about game theory.
Such as: a Robin Hood game where the PCs are the outside force attacking in the Inn. (view the Inn as Nottiongham...PCs are off in the woods or at the horse camp looking in, instead of being at the center waiting for the NPC attack. Maybe someone gets captured & they need to stage a jailbreak...)
Or Iron Age Game - gods are local. If you want to worship your god (and use spells) by our city, you must pay a fee to our temple. Put PCs on all sides of a conflict (like City vs neighboring Trive vs travelling tribe). No favoritism, no saying who should win. Just define the basic parameters and conflict & let it fly.

Cast against Type on a smaller level. Make Sam Gailey the crotchety old commander, yes...who (Gilles de Rais-like) is also the child-sacrificing demon worshipper. Make the Big Bad a cold calculating Lich...a Dr Moreau scientist type, not a yelling, throw-spells-everywhere Lich. Better yet, never show the Big Bad in a Sauron-like style.
Make stopping the Evil hurt (the way destroying the Ring means the elves must leave or be doomed)

Things like that. Keep things from getting in a rut by mixing up assumptions. I will note that *as written*, Gray Areas followed this. Right down to "Not all the villagers are happy to see you" part.

- The best games (and stories) are character-driven. Or as Graham Greene said, "character IS plot".
Perhaps beyond RPCing, designing games (or chunks of them) with specific characters in mind might be very interesting. And partly solve the eternal problem of getting PCs involved.

-Staff sizes. Sometimes you have a lot of characters on-screen at once, but also after Too Many Times of the 4-6-person Crunchy Squad getting Mass Thunderclapped & obliterated without throwing a single shot, folks decided More Was Better.


- Fighting - No Kneeling! (unless you have legal head shots)

- Armor. Real armor was indeed pretty darn good. You could fight all day in it until you a) got stabbed b) got hit where it didn't cover
c) got battered down or d) got hit by something like a poleaxe that could actually cleave (2-handed) through it.

I like the Armor X is proof vs Y model. Though perhaps the model used by the SCA Tournament Companies has more "playability" => You fight until you take 3 (or whatever) good hits. No acting of wounds (as you haven't been actually cut...just getting battered in your armor). Weapons like a poleaxe or stabbing weapons might need only 2 to get you (representing their greater effectiveness).


- Otherworld is **** Fun for Staff & PCs alike. Partly because the situation is not really analagous to Quest - the NPC pool is seperate from the PC pool, so you can have as many as you like and not worry about losing potential PCs when recruiting staff. Partly because all of us on the staff have consciously made PC enjoyment top priority, and then taken the steps to see that we have as much fun as they do. Part of this involves not making the mistake of thinking we are PCs too and keeping our roles in perspective. Remember back to your Friday there...didn't a tavern full of people feel more real to you?
We have fun BEING our characters; they aren't just throwaways. It is as satisfying an RP experience as I usually get as a PC elsewhere. It also keeps our combats from getting crazy as the NPCs try desperately to win, because it is much more friendly. Nobody getting PO'd if the PCs just don't want to bop one more time Saturday.

I noticed more than a few times this past weekend when NPCs forgot that cardinal tenent - We are here to facilitate THEIR (PCs) fun. Not to kill characters. Not overwhelm them with unlimited re-spawns and spell points. No matter how much fun we have, if the PCs didn't, we have failed. Period. Note also that "their fun comes first" is a thing apart from "our fun is incidental"

Now if you want to get away from this, make all sides be PCs and have limited resources and info.

- Remembering we are here to have fun with our friends (old & new) not step & fetch for the Rules. Or, remembering the Sabbath was made for Man, not Man for the Sabbath.
Which means, among other things, not pissing on folks in the name of "upholding policy". It's BS and a dodge for doing dirt to your friends.

- Radios next to PCs Bad! Radios in general: **** Useful for coordinating. So keep them out of PC earshot (earplugs, in the hands of a decently-off-screen NPC something)

[Clay Dreslough]

Originally posted by JimV
- Radios next to PCs Bad! Radios in general: **** Useful for coordinating. So keep them out of PC earshot (earplugs, in the hands of a decently-off-screen NPC something)

I could see having 2 bases with radios where PCs aren't allowed. But I worry that's like bringing a 5-year-old to a quest game and assuming they won't "get in the way".

Eventually someone will run somewhere with a radio and it's all over. I was in an ambush at Grey Areas where we were 2 archers and 2 zombies sneaking up on the PCs at night near the lodge. The other archer's radio goes off and our cover is blown. Ouch.

[JimV]

>could see having 2 bases with radios where PCs aren't allowed. >But I worry that's like bringing a 5-year-old to a quest game and >assuming they won't "get in the way".

They do make a tasty stew.

We did have 2 radios like that around '96 at "Return of Decius" and the like. It was...inadequate.

>I was in an ambush at Grey Areas where we were 2 archers >and 2 zombies sneaking up on the PCs at night near the lodge. >The other archer's radio goes off and our cover is blown. Ouch.

Yeah...on the rare occasions when I was actually trying to be sneaky last weekend, I did the naughty thing of turning mine off for a few minutes. As I'm not a medic & there's usually someone else close by who was in-scene who had one one, I didn't feel too bad. The communication/coordination ability is a Godsend...but the surprise-spoling tweedles (and sometimes the overly-loud Off-Screen comments PCs overhear) are a headache.

[Clay Dreslough]

John M. tells me if you put a headset into the radio, it makes no noise so we just need better gear, actually.

Perhaps the bigger problem is we need to plan games ASSUMING there will be no radios. The packets should be clear enough that the GM could get Ebola on Friday and the game would still run well.

Clay

[JimV]

.
The packets should be clear enough that the GM could get Ebola on Friday and the game would still run well.

That's the truth! One step is making sure all the GMs understand their own game. It is a trend I have noticed since at least "Second Stand" of ever-increasing NPC packet size. While this can be handy in meticulously laying out the GM's vision, it so very rarely survives contact with the PCs and can frankly be confusing to the staff. There's also the headache of staff being able to figure it all out by game time. (for OIT, it works because we get them months in advance, have already done things very similar the year before, and know we're only responsible for just a few parts of the whole).

I still think the packets for games like CtA and Dawn Of Deception were the best for a free-form play style. Those on Staff knew the basic background and what the general plotline was and had a decent enough grasp of their characters so that *when* the Unexpected happened, we could go with it and still nudge things in the intended direction. PC action having an effect on the story was built-in. As it should be (my own theory of "we are telling a story together" not "welcome to my play, PCs. here are your lines")
When the plot is more a series of destinations reachable by many paths rather than a rigid road map, it seems the game flows more easily. The players don't know that within generous parameters whatever they do may well work and instead of the frustration of having to get the Right Answer, their creativity can be more easily rewarded.

Do you think it would work to have indeed no plot at all? In the sense of not trying to plan *how* the PCs will learn of or stop the Big Plan? I am wondering if it might indeed work to simply wind up the Big Bad's plan...what he wants & would be doing if the PCs never showed up and then have him go about it until he gets stopped. (after some basic insurance that his plan is both comphrensible & stoppable). This could verge close to the idea of having the Big Bad and his minions be almost like PCs themselves.
Reacting to PC action, imperfect knowledge and limited resources, etc. We could sure do worse than patterning after a Bond villain ;-)

[Seoman]

I started writing the game, Clay. I'll send you information in email soon. This information you guys are providing is invaluable for making a game balanced and fun, so keep it coming. I think we should commit energy into making a game which has the "Clockmaker" mentality. You write something simple and flexible like 'grep' or 'cat' and then you walk away and empower your staff to do what they want to with it. The more minds committed to the idea of making a great adventure for the PCs, the more reactiveness overall you can have with the PCs. Totally agree on not timing anything, etc.

Don't have your NPCs on a clock. Have them in an area with other NPCs who know the ten different things that they can do by default and let them riff off of any of that so that they're not stuck "thinking" up something. Give them lots of default options and laminate some cards and let them look at them. Instead of using radios for all communication, build an in-game communication system which goes undetected or is unknown to the PCs. Be it Tolkien's Elvish to a number scheme, have a way of people contacting each other that makes sense from an in-game perspective. Eliminate radios at all costs. Most anachronistic piece of malarckey ever. If you find you're a NPC alone, and you're dressed as a crunchy and they're coming to kill you, win them with some roleplaying. If you find you out-number the PCs badly in a certain area, give them a scare of their life.

I'll keep details out of this thread because I want you to be able to PC, Jim. :)

[JimV]

Thanks, sounds like a game it'd be fun to play ("just like old times"...when Doty & I and some others used Elvish written in the sand for notes )

One thing I'll note is that some of these ideas have been used in some recent games..."10,000 Daggers" in particular incorporated many. (In that one, the PCs were 4 Noble Families competing to see who would become the next Doge of a Delonnan island). Sort of a political RP Scavenger Hunt. The NPCs were mainly representatives of various power groups we each tried to form deals with and the result of the game was exclusively PC-determined. A whole lot of fun too.

"Mysteries of the Sunken Hundred" also had an outcome heavily dependent on PC action. One thing the PCs could do in it was get as many truenames as possible of the High King and his chief lieutenants for their own Counter Ritual. Those they had & got right had their powers dissapated, so in the end they only had to face ~50% of the possible enemies (and had also eliminated my High King, with my power to Mass Raise my soul-bound minions).

I don't know if John was at "Marilyna", but be careful of the kind of atmosphere that raised to some of us playing it. We had a great time through ~2:30 on Saturday with the whole build/explore the settlement. The 1,000-strong rampaging Orc Army That Has Already Sealed Off Your Escape got frustrating & infuriating all too soon. (I and some others came very close to simply going home Saturday night). Part of it was I don't mind a stiff fight, but I do mind being kicked in the teeth over and over in what seems malicious glee and then asked "Aren't you having fun?" I really do have better things to do with my time & money than be emotionally abused. It is a fine line to draw sometimes but it is crucial that it be made clear.

One general game design thing you might wish to look at is something James Gregory & I were cooking up in '96 after "The Hollows"...a kind of Old Style game. It had 3 Plot Paths, to be sure...but like Otherworld, they weren't connected to each other and there was no incentive to glom on them. One involved a likeable March Lord (envisioned as Dillon) being replaced by a harsh one (Hrothgar) who winds up murdered. Mystery & intrigue ensue. There was also a powerful undead called the Virgulk around (a kind of vampire) that needed dispatching. Part of that involved gaining items (a lamp & net were envisioned) from the Ghosts of 2 Brothers...one of whom was only out in day, the other only at night...and so on.

[IronMonkey]

Guys,

Your ideas generally jive with mine.

1) NPCs are there to have fun serving the players. They are not there to have
fun at the expense of the players. I have no problem with firing NPCs mid-game. Of course then there are plot issues since they have knowledge of sensitive issues. Which brings me into my next point.

2) Minimize plotting (with the except of
'nexus' events or cool experiences you
really want them to have). Instead, maximize situations. If you want PC conflict, set them up in situations where its rational for them to fight. Limited resources, pre-existing grudges, solutions which require sacrifice,
etc. I hate the 'Star Trek' meta-game
solution where people all play nice regardless of whether or not it makes sense. Players shouldn't have to think about being good or evil. They should jus react rationally for their character.

3) Change spellcasting and while you're at it, change the way it affects combat.
a) healing should take longer. Healing
someone in the middle of combat should be hard. How about this:
healing takes 1-3 minutes per hit healed, maybe modified by the level of the caster. You don't necessarily need to chant the whole time but the effect takes some time to kick in. Healers should be vulnerable while healing.
Maybe you have to close your eyes or you experience weakness after healing. Make it so that you set your healers up some place safe and you bring the bodies to them. Or else you launch a little mission to bring the healers
to the bodies. I'm thinking that spellcasting could come in two flavors (at least for healing). There's ad hoc, which takes the full time. And there's pre-cast which is much faster but the points are essentially committed. And maybe they evaporate if you don't use them within 30 minutes. So prior to a big combat, you could have a MASH area to the side where your clerics pre-cast their healing and wait for casualities to roll in. I think when you pre-cast maybe you have to prepare a spell circle or altar. Hmm, I like the idea of altars. We should do something with this.

In compensation, I would give the clerics more healing points. Also, I would make combat less instantaneously fatal. You take too many hits and you go down unconscious. Someone with first aid can
keep you alive indefinitely but they need to 'treat' you every 5 minutes. A cleric can cast a quick 1 point spell that will stabilize you for 30 minutes. Its would only be a small alteration to the current system. I want to make combat more fun and yet more dangerous. So, less yo-yoing in and out of combat as you get instant healed. However, you can get hacked down and come back from the edge of death more easily. If you have friends...

4) Medium power games. Low power games suck. Not enough fantasy to it. High power games make it all about optimizing your points. Medium power games give you a chance to come up with a solid ability and then leverage that ability by being smart.

5) More PCs, fewer NPCs, very few NPCs with special knowledge. Make NPCs basically just PCs with special plotting. This way they are much more natural and there is less division between PCs and NPCs

I like John's analog of building the
basic utilities so that the players
can help themselves. In this case,
I sort of view the NPCs as the utilities. If we want a mad witchdoctor in the game, lets create one, give him motivations and then set him free.
Presumably, we pick someone who
is responsible enough to play the role faithfully and not just be malicious.
Actually, even though Otherworlds is
highly plotted, we had a fair amount
of latitude as NPCs.

[Clay Dreslough]

So, Gordon and Jim? Who wants to run a game with us?

[Clay Dreslough]

Originally posted by IronMonkey
Healing someone in the middle of combat should be hard. How about this: healing takes 1-3 minutes per hit healed, maybe modified by the level of the caster.

I haven't seen any problem with in-combat healing. The vast majority of healing is done after the crunchies have been dispatched.

If you're brave enough to lean over a comrade and heal him before the area is safe, more power to you I say (also after seeing some of the rule confusion even with experienced players, I really think we need to make the rules simpler not more complicated if at all possible).

Clay

[Clay Dreslough]

Originally posted by IronMonkey
4) Medium power games. Low power games suck. Not enough fantasy to it. High power games make it all about optimizing your points. Medium power games give you a chance to come up with a solid ability and then leverage that ability by being smart.

Yeah I was just AIMing with Sam and we are both annoyed about the armor/stoneskin escalation. His solution is to run low power games. But I think you actually need to try a game with different rules. 10-point mages aren't that interesting.

I REALLY want to run a one-shot with all PCs at the same point level. But the CG rules, especially with all the different spells, were made for a CG world. Frex, spells like Drop Weapon were created so low-level casters would have something to do. But if everyone has 25 points, you don't need a lot of those 1st and 2nd level spells that break up combat. You also don't need all those freaking barkskins. You also don't need 'Weapon Debt'.

[Clay Dreslough]

A poll to ignite further discussion:

http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=72718

[JimV]

Originally posted by Clay Dreslough
Yeah I was just AIMing with Sam and we are both annoyed about the armor/stoneskin escalation. His solution is to run low power games. But I think you actually need to try a game with different rules. 10-point mages aren't that interesting.

While I was thinking about this, it seemed best to first ask what it was you and Sam are trying to accomplish that you see this as a problem? As it has lately only affected between 2 to 6 of the total PCs - the ones playing fighters using armor who also get Stoneskins cast on them- I'm less sure it requires drastic re-tooling, or being called "escalation." A few people are finally (after a dozen years) able to afford plate with a party Mage to buff them. Perhaps we need to scale encounters better instead of penalizing PCs for following the rules. Don't blame them. Would you do any differently in their place?
Then too, these are supposed to be HEROES...they should be tough & hard to take down.

(as someone whose Fighters hardly ever get a Bark/Stoneskin, I suspect it depends on coming with a party, already set to buff you)

Scaling encounters is key too. If you have a tough party (imagine the Reavers reborn as well as the 3 -4 shields at "Gray Areas") and for whatever reason want to batter them, don't toss in the 1-hit, single-sword Zombies. Toss in something that also has 3-5 hits and ~12-15 Weapons and both a 4-5th lvl Mage AND Cleric. Make them fight themselves, or something only slightly less. That's a fight they will remember.

Partly I point back to our earlier topic of "as an NPC it is *not* your job to win", and also that you've no right to complain if the PCs survive your attack. There is a creeping trap in NPCs starting to think they are PCs, with an equal right to have attacks succeed or your role do X instead of serving the story and so on.
We are not competitors but entertainers.


As for changing rules, there is something to that, definitely...such as making Stoneskin & Armor the same and not "stacking". If we used the Living Fiction design "chain is proof vs 1-H slashing", then having a spell like Barkskin give the same effect for an hour, and Stoneskin act like Plate, would prevent layering them with Armor as they'd be redundant.

Low-point games are just Not Much Fun. As I'm certain you recall, the Point System was calibrated/normalized at 28/30 pts and the further away from that you get the more distorted values become. Especially on the low end, where (just as in real life)Point Poverty can cripple you swiftly in the face of escalating Skill Costs. Taking 60% of my available ability to learn how to use a basic weapon? John Dillon was right when he complained how the 10pt base made the starting adventurer weaker than the average squire/1st level D&D fighter. Having played such characters, I've found them a waste of time...simply marking time until I'd finally scraped up the points to start playing a character vaguely like the one I'd wanted to play when I first cooked them up.



I REALLY want to run a one-shot with all PCs at the same point level. But the CG rules, especially with all the different spells, were made for a CG world. Frex, spells like Drop Weapon were created so low-level casters would have something to do. But if everyone has 25 points, you don't need a lot of those 1st and 2nd level spells that break up combat. You also don't need all those freaking barkskins. You also don't need 'Weapon Debt'. [/B]

Ah yes...a game where everyone is built on the same points would be a lot of fun. No having to scale combats up or down as your Crunch Squad bounces from the party of Plate & Shield fighters to that of the 10pt Sages.

You know who still loves all those Bark/Stoneskins? Rogues, Clerics and Mages...who want to be able to take that 1 hit & still be able to escape & be effective.
The low-level spells are still quite popular, as they are cheap tactical advantages. It might be interesting to re-introduce Resistence, like in Adventure Game days, so a Mage might not be so sure that low-level spell would work against the rampaging Ogre.

Weapon debt you wouldn't need. It's an artifact of those inadequate 10 starting points. (I note that a 14 pt character seems fairly decent for a starting character who can make a contribution and not be a liability)

Give PCs the tools to be Heroes and NPCs the permission to be challenging and things ought to go well.

[Clay Dreslough]

From the Quest "New Player Guide":

The basic principle of combat is pretty simple: "whatever gets hit is wounded." If your arm takes a blow, your arm is wounded and you cannot use it. A leg wound means you can't walk on that leg; a torso wound knocks you unconscious. Take enough wounds, and you'll die. There's no counting of "hit points" or "damage modifiers"

I'm not arguing the NPCs need to be powered up to match the PCs. I played a Treeven that took 8 hits at Gray Areas. I was counting hit points.

There are two different areas of discussion. The first is PC danger. I'm a strong subscriber to the theory that PCs can't truly feel like heroes if there is NO chance they will fail. For me, and for many players, this means that some PCs should DIE during the weekend. That's not what I'm getting at with the Stoneskins though. If someone wants to run a low-lethality game, that's great. I just think the combats are a lot less fun when you're counting hit points.

In Gray Areas I was instructed as a crunchy to kill some people. This meant I had a few times when I got into the underbelly of a party and struck a few blows.

On FIVE occasions, I hit someone and they played the wound (for example, by falling to the ground as from a torso wound). I looked up a few seconds later and the wounded party was no longer wounded. On three occasions they acknowledged this disparity by making eye contact and saying 'armor' (well actually, two occasions -- the 3rd was a special case where they had to actually stop combat and ask if I was undead, because they had 1 hit of protection 'against undead').

The attacker feels frustrated when this happens. And frankly (as I've been on the defensive side of this myself), the defender feels like an idiot when he plays a wound and then realizes the hit shouldn't have counted.

In my case (and I might be in the minority), I have a hard time paying 100% to a fight after a mishap like that. If I'm the one that made the mistake I might semi-consciously fight down because I feel bad.

I've noticed I don't have a problem with calibration in these situations, but I THINK some players do, when they get frustrated in combat.

Anyway, imagine the following 2 combats:

1) 6 Ghouls, each with a 'Toughness' of 2, attack a party of 6 PCs. The archer hits with two arrows but they have no visible effect. The mage casts a lightning bolt that hits one in the chest, but he doesn't go down. The fighters in the party close on the monsters and beat on them. The Ghouls get several shots in but none of the fighters go down and the Ghouls are defeated. Afterward, the mage comes by and buffs up everyone's protection spells.

2) 6 Ghouls, with no 'Toughness', attack a party of 6 PCs. As they close, the archer kills one and legs another. The mage obliterates one with a well-placed Lightning Bolt. The Ghouls leg one of the fighters and he drops to the ground. The rest of the party rallies around him and the Ghouls have a tactical advantage. Another fighter has his arm wounded. As he fights the last Ghoul, he takes a torso wound and begins to bleed to death. The party surrounds the last Ghoul and finishes him off. The party Cleric quickly comes to the aid of the wounded party members and everyone is healed.

Neither of these combats killed a PC, and both used up a good number of spell points. But even when there is no rules confusion, the combat without protection is still more fun IMHO.

Clay

[JimV]

Heh...I hope you can make it to the Flag War then, where we can try out some non-Protected combat. ;-)

(of course, people go in not expecting to "survive"...)

[DeathMitten]

You don't need to have a lot of NPCs at all.

Look at the Russians. They stage giant games [biggest ones are outdoor ones hosting 2500-3500 players, I kid you not], and they often have no more than a few dozen NPCs.

NPCs in LARPs should exist only to nudge the game slightly in one direction or antoher.

They should never, ever, ever be the prime mover of the plot. That's the PC's job by and large.

[JimV]

That's quite astonishing! I'd like to know more about those events.

We usually use our NPC in the usual RPG role of "everyone you meet" - the villagers, the villains, assorted random folk in between. PCs generally arrive in the game area with only vague ideas of what is happening & the Staff (through RP) provides information so they can figure out (usually!) what is going on and what to do about it.
Given that typical game design, having Staff available regularly is helpful so at the very least PCs don't start to feel rudderless and wander about aimlessly. I have seen games where PCs take on most major roles (such as ones set in a town, where PCs fill roles like Constable, Mayor, etc), but ours tend to follow the D&D module model. Which is something that perhaps could use a kick in the head...


I am wondering, since "Behind Enemy Lines", what folks think of how some of these ideas turned out in practice? Granted, due to the low turnout, the results may be less-than-representative. In particular, I think the "critters vulnerable only to thrusts" was cool, but a bit overdone - though that could just be the experience of being with a praty surrounded by a throng of them and not a thrusting weapon amongst us. *shrug* I don't recall what pre-game info the PCs saw, but was that part conveyed to them? Definitely something that "adventurers" actually living in that world might have heard about. At the very least they could have all picked up some wimbly daggers ;-)

At the Overlook sequel ("Truth of a Legend"), we were going for a kinda of minimalist design. Mainly as a reminder that in large measure, 3 people by themselves could put together and run a weekend game. We hoped to make a layered world where the setting was something to be explored and some useful things found, but that not everything related to the plot directly. (the Hero's Barrow as a case in point - there to give the land some sense of history...and that it also led to some cool RP moments was gravy). As always, many things happened that we'd not planned, but that's the great thing about games - PCs didn't read the NPC Briefing! They don't know that the plot jumped the tracks 2 hours ago and we're partially winging it! People want to open a gate to Hell? Ok! Give us a few minutes and then go! :-)
Just love it when a One-shot game ends and people are clamoring to keep playing in that world. :-)