Death

[Dredge]

More of a metaquestion, but what place does death play in Final Haven. To clarify, I mean the rules governing living, dying, surviving, resurrection, etc. and how those add to the game and the purpose they serve. For example, is it to promote realism, protagonism, or perhaps a nebulous balance?

I ask this, because most larps I've asked this about talk about the sting of death and many times an attitude of putting the players in their place seems to be bandied about. I'm curious as to how this is viewed by those who made this game, those who play it, and anyone else with an opinion.

[GM-Mike]

Being able to die adds power to the game. You have to be able to risk everything so that one's accomplishments and ultimate victory become meaningful, even inspirational. It has nothing to do with putting players in their place. It's simply a way to raise the stakes, to increase tension, to promote heroism. It also allows players to deal with conflict amongst themselves, which also raises tension and some awesome role playing moments. It allows for both good and evil amongst the players. In short, you have to be able to die. Now we're just trying to find what that balance is so that players are fearful of death but not so much so that they cower in the corner of the inn.

[dier_cire]

Doing a paper or something?

And mostly if you want specific rules, download the rules on the main page and read the death section. That'd be the easiest way to get those.

As for purpose, ultimately, for me it boils down to if there wasn't a limit to what you could do what would be the point? It's like playing a video game with god mode on. Beating a game (or other players) like that is a waste of time. A person who plays games like this is looking for the end result and not the joy of overcoming the obstacles laid out. If you have nothing to lose by being dumb, then there's no challenge. Without challenge you don't really learn anything and probably don't have as much fun.

[WayneO42]

That is a very complex question that cuts to the very nature of a LARP. As a game designer and GM I see LARP as a colaberative story. Each character, be they PC or NPC, brings a thread to the overall tapestry of the story. Without death, everyone would always succeed and the tapestry would be a pastel rainbow that is about as interesting as watching paint dry. Death adds the true "human" aspect to the story. It makes success sweet because the possibility of failure is real. It adds consequence to bad decissions that makes good decisions more satisfying. It stirs emotions. It makes Heros.

[Nelkie]

I agree with Mike and Eric's statements. It is so much more fun in a Larp when there is a sense of danger and a chance one will not be successful in their actions. I believe death is required in any good story or Larp.

[Dredge]

Not writing a paper, but I love discussing RPG theory.

I suppose from some standpoints, the threat of death is necessary to make the story good, but I sometimes wonder about its implementation. For instance, death in larp can result from bad luck as much as it can from bad decisions.

(Extremely) Bad Decision: Going off on ones own to hunt down some monsters, with no back up, in bright clothing.

(Extremely) Bad Luck: Outside of inn with several allies around you, enough to feel quite safe, you watch as gamestop is called, an area of effect attack knocks them all down, and you get rushed by multiple attackers now that you are without help.

I'm also curious as to story purpose attached to NPCs. If a wave of enemies is sent as a way to get the players attention to plot event X, are they out to kill or out to wound? Both will get player attention.

I realize death is necessary, dramatic when done well, but I'm curious as to how it balances in the game.

[GM_Chris]

All enemies have a motivation and personality or at least should.

Most things evil will not fight to the death, are scared, and untrusting. Tehy will tend to flee easily..or at least should.


Some of what you speak of is mechanics. Sometimes even th heroes have to have unheoic deaths.

Somethimes death is pointless

[dier_cire]

The bad luck thing sucks but that happens in real life too.

now as for NPCs, well, it would ultimately depend on who/what they are. I mean if the plot was "Prey animals are all dead and the predators are starving" the NPCs would act a lot different than say "Imp scouting party for Impish army".

As far as balance, well, it allows (sometimes forces) players to push the limits but without allowing them to enter the world of absurd. Like fighting a 3 on 1 is possible with lots of defensive fighting, but 6 on 1 would be death (without death or without a real penalty this would be attempted).

[Dredge]

So... extrapolating from several peoples response...

1)Death is necessary for drama. Makes story better.
2)But sometimes death should be pointless. More realistic.

3)Death should occur from bad play. More realistic & better story.
4)But will result from bad luck. Worse story & more realistic.

While these aren't necessarily incompatible, it does suggest priority towards more realism with a less compelling story. The only suggestion I would have is to try and minimize bad luck deaths and badly RPed NPCs, though I understand there can be difficulties in doing this.

That being said this is still the best LARP I've ever seen, generally fair in its lethality.

[Kalphoenix]

Now we're just trying to find what that balance is so that players are fearful of death but not so much so that they cower in the corner of the inn.

I think this said it best, and I think this is a good discussion of opinions.

It is a fantasy world, and death shouldn't be the same sting it has in the real world, however, without the possibility of a penalty, sacrifice in the face of duty is moot. It shouldn't be a corpsefest, but neither should it be as easy as in an online game where you just pop back up, with no problem. That being said, it's also not MY rules or MY game, so it's the GM's call as to how the world works.

We got into a discussion about this one night over in the Muskegon area and the big concern most people had is that they didn't want to die over something stupid, or just because of bad luck.

I'm dealing with the upcoming changes to the way death works by reminding myself of three things:

One, I have never taken dying lightly in this LARP, because even if you can be brought back, it should change your character somehow.

Two, I try not to put myself into a situation where my character will be killed.

Three, I seem to recall one of the GMs saying somewhere in the forums that unless there was a good reason why you shouldn't be allowed to do so, you could start the character over.

Are we really having such a problem with people taking death so lightly that we are going to make it likely that a quarter of the population will die every game? I just know from last year that things got deadlier and deadlier each game and it was way too easy to get killed. That being said, we did have an appocolypse in the mix, so maybe things will be tamer, and less chances for people to get the crap kicked out of them by NPCs.

With a pretty possible chance that you can't be brought back, even if you can find someone who can cast the spell...eeek. It's really too late now to get into a discussion about how it would be more fun to throw some penalties into the mix for being rezzed (You are starving for the rest of the event, or you loose access to these skills for the remainder of the event, you are too scared to fight except to defend yourself, etc.) I would like to see that, as opposed to "You now have a 30% chance of not being able to be brought back."

Balance is hard.

[Doctor Erasmus]

One thing I will point out though, I know of several individuals that choose to have their characters stay dead during the last event for a variety of different reasons. Death is often times an easy thing to shrug off in Haven, but there is something to be said for letting a character go at the appropriate moment.

[GM-Mike]

As a note, most events won't have NPC's running around chopping off heads. Last event was the exception, not the rule.

[WayneO42]

Are we really having such a problem with people taking death so lightly that we are going to make it likely that a quarter of the population will die every game?

Where the heck did you get that figure? Based on the rules we are finalizing now, about 1 in 10 people who are raised will be raised unsuccessfully.

1)Death is necessary for drama. Makes story better.

Exactly. Final Haven is Medium Fantasy that tilts towards Dark Fantasy. Its about rebuilding a world in the face of adversity. Without the fear of death the accomplisments of the players are moot. Societies are rebuilt on the backs of the fallen.

2)But sometimes death should be pointless. More realistic.

Not really what was said. Sometimes death is pointless but pointless deaths are by no means strived for by the GM staff nor promoted by the mechanics.

3)Death should occur from bad play. More realistic & better story.

I would argue that Bad play results in death. Thats a player choice. We never Dumb down plots.

4)But will result from bad luck. Worse story & more realistic.

We have a mechanic for countering plain old bad luck. Its called a hero point and can be used in many situations to avoid death from simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

You keep throwing around the word realism but our game is far from realistic in terms of death. It is our philosophy as a design team that sometimes realism needs to take a back seat to game playability. Realism would be not having a way to bring the dead back at all. In my opinion, the worst stories of all are the ones that go on too long. Death is an end to story and a fresh begining to a new one. It keeps a story dynamic whether the death be heroic or not. Sure, some deaths may be pointless but no death is EVER meaningless.

All in all I think there are a lot of rumors flying around the player base about the new res rules and the lethality of the game going forward. We are in the final stages of writing up the new rules and they will be posted shortly.

[Dredge]

I'm new enough to not be aware of any rumors. I'm just digging to see what the design philosophy was in regard to death in a story, the death mechanics, as well as how they are implemented by those who run the plot.

The realism that I mention is due to trying to find the design focus. LARP offers quite a different experience from tabletop and generally seems to have a simulationist focus(ie realism or game of what-if, story or not), with a lot of gamist(ie, fight to win, to get the XP and treasure) mechanics thrown in for D&D nostalgia.

I like narrativist(story focus) more, and this game eliminates a lot of the gamist BS by having fast leveling, a social mechanic, and a lot of room to RP, especially having a 'safe' zone. It doesn't seem to treat new players like NPCs or extras to be killed to show the lethality of the game. KANAR had a habit of this, whether they believed it or not.

To be honest, this is a game where I would not be bothered by just retiring one of my old characters by having him leave and then start another one, which can definitely 'end' a character.

So, to sum up, this is an awesome game. However, my experience with death in the game came rather swiftly and I'm just trying to pick peoples brains on whether or not that is normal.

[Doctor Erasmus]

Definitely not normal. The past several games were the culmination of an ongoing plot and as such a lot of things were taken to extremes. Battles with NPC's were vicious and bloodthirsty as the stakes were high, many a PC was slain (some permanently) for the sake of plot and a good story. The situation was dire and if the Pc's won it would be by the skin of their teeth. The amount of death and carnage was a reflection of this. I truly believe though things will be toned down as far as NPC's are concerned.

But I'd watch out for some of them PC's, I'm not entirely sure they're all trustworthy...