I'm curious
-
Todd
- Town Member
- Posts: 1111
- Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 12:03 am
- Location: somewhere making someone angry
I'm curious
I'm curious to see what you all have to say. In the persuit of Organization, and Efficiency, what is the best way to run a LARP. By Dictatorship, Committee, or Consensus?
Last edited by Todd on Tue Oct 12, 2004 5:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
Bob-Z (kabre)
- Town Member
- Posts: 190
- Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 6:06 pm
- Contact:
I voted consensus, but that needs to be qualified. From my limited experience with LARP, it would seem to me that all of the options need to come into play at one time or another. A comittee needs to come up with the base rules, and needs to ratify any modifications or new rules. I like the marshall idea for specific areas of expertise, and during game play each marshall should have unilateral control over his/her area for quick decisionmaking, and a consensus is nice for ongoing ideas, questions, and refinment. I guess, in short, I like how you're doing it.
Moo.
See I can't really choose since it depends on the aspect fo the LARP you are running. Personally, I don't think the people running plots should be writing the rules. The mindset to do each is completely opposite. One is pure creative and the other pure technical. I think the plot team should come up with the ideas of what they want to see, and then hand those ideas over to a team that purely focuses on the mechanics section. Then the mechanics team takes those ideas and turns them into rules that fit into the system and return said rules to the plot team. Idealy, this way both teams can focus on just one thing instead of one team trying to shift focus from one thing to the another all the time causing themselves massive stress.
I guess I would go commitee though since each team would sort of be a commmitee, but ultimately having a team lead to decide yes or no in things that weren't clear cut.
Also I'd kill the 'marshall' idea to a point. 'Marshalls' probably wouldn't be in charge of writing the section of the rules they are in charge of. I don't like one person writing a section. It's too easy to get caught up in the 'this would be cool (ie broken)' mode. Each section should be finished individually, yes, however the whole tem would work on each section. Makes balancing much easier.
Just my thoughts.
I guess I would go commitee though since each team would sort of be a commmitee, but ultimately having a team lead to decide yes or no in things that weren't clear cut.
Also I'd kill the 'marshall' idea to a point. 'Marshalls' probably wouldn't be in charge of writing the section of the rules they are in charge of. I don't like one person writing a section. It's too easy to get caught up in the 'this would be cool (ie broken)' mode. Each section should be finished individually, yes, however the whole tem would work on each section. Makes balancing much easier.
Just my thoughts.
The question at hand is what is the best way to RUN a larp, not create one. If Todd means create and then run, then this is my view...
The rules should be set by those whose vision it was to create a game world. The physics of the game world should be created, and then recorded. This builds a basis for the "feel" and "spirit" of the rules/mechanics.
Then rules should be drafted that will allow the physics of the fantasy world to occur in a fair and balanced manner. Some things should be weak, but easy to acquire/learn; some should be useful but harder to acquire, and some should be devastating, but rare and hard to acquire. This creates a realistic dynamic and goals to strive for, as well as tools for plot to use to create tough opponents.
Once the rules of how the physics of the world are set, overall plot should be time lined for 5 to 10 years in broad strokes, and outlined in finer detail for each year, and then by event. This doesn’t mean that smaller one-shot plot has to be planned 5 years ahead, just stuff like the Florin plot and the King Roderick stuff. Plot ideas will come up later and can then be evaluated as to how well they fit in the overall plan, and if they are tasty enough, if they warrant changing the overall plan.
If a single person is creating he world, then he may chose to go with a dictatorship on how the world works, and what the rules are that make the game simulate that world. Most often it’s a team of friends that decide to make it happen, then you have a committee for the first two parts of the process.
The running of the larp from that point on needs to be a dictatorship, with the dictator delegating tasks. Even if the owners of the system vote that dictator in for a one, two, or three-year term a single person should lead the organization so that it has focus. Set up a rotating schedule however is desired, but one-year terms should be the minimum.
Head Marshals should then be designated to head special areas. These should include, but not be limited to: logistics, rules (covering consistency and final arbitration on questions), safety, props/costumes (like a quarter master), plot, rogue, ritual/spell, alchemy, and racial (covers proper costuming, and provides background material to players starting a new PC). Marshals can then be appointed and trained by the head marshal in each area to assist in the running of that area, especially when the head marshal cannot be in attendance.
To differentiate between the owners/creators and head and regular marshals (who may or may not be a owner/creator of the system as well), a title such as GM or Director would be a useful tool to have. GM/Directors should be able to handle any task a head marshal or marshal would be needed for.
This method builds consistancy, versatility, and balance.
The rules should be set by those whose vision it was to create a game world. The physics of the game world should be created, and then recorded. This builds a basis for the "feel" and "spirit" of the rules/mechanics.
Then rules should be drafted that will allow the physics of the fantasy world to occur in a fair and balanced manner. Some things should be weak, but easy to acquire/learn; some should be useful but harder to acquire, and some should be devastating, but rare and hard to acquire. This creates a realistic dynamic and goals to strive for, as well as tools for plot to use to create tough opponents.
Once the rules of how the physics of the world are set, overall plot should be time lined for 5 to 10 years in broad strokes, and outlined in finer detail for each year, and then by event. This doesn’t mean that smaller one-shot plot has to be planned 5 years ahead, just stuff like the Florin plot and the King Roderick stuff. Plot ideas will come up later and can then be evaluated as to how well they fit in the overall plan, and if they are tasty enough, if they warrant changing the overall plan.
If a single person is creating he world, then he may chose to go with a dictatorship on how the world works, and what the rules are that make the game simulate that world. Most often it’s a team of friends that decide to make it happen, then you have a committee for the first two parts of the process.
The running of the larp from that point on needs to be a dictatorship, with the dictator delegating tasks. Even if the owners of the system vote that dictator in for a one, two, or three-year term a single person should lead the organization so that it has focus. Set up a rotating schedule however is desired, but one-year terms should be the minimum.
Head Marshals should then be designated to head special areas. These should include, but not be limited to: logistics, rules (covering consistency and final arbitration on questions), safety, props/costumes (like a quarter master), plot, rogue, ritual/spell, alchemy, and racial (covers proper costuming, and provides background material to players starting a new PC). Marshals can then be appointed and trained by the head marshal in each area to assist in the running of that area, especially when the head marshal cannot be in attendance.
To differentiate between the owners/creators and head and regular marshals (who may or may not be a owner/creator of the system as well), a title such as GM or Director would be a useful tool to have. GM/Directors should be able to handle any task a head marshal or marshal would be needed for.
This method builds consistancy, versatility, and balance.
Grand High Chancellor of ROBUST UNPLEASANTNESS
...and the 11th commandment is:
"The stupid shall be punished!"
...and the 11th commandment is:
"The stupid shall be punished!"
Committe
I vote for a committe.
I agree with Eric in that the plot them should only focus on plot related items and have a mechanics team take care of the rules.
I like the idea of 1 person be the expert in one secition of the rule book, magic marshal, alchemy marshel, etc... so they can make the quick descisions during game, keep track of them of the decisions, and have a centeral person for the PC's to ask questions of that specific area in the rules. This spreads the stress of PC questions over mulitple people and does no inadate one person. Also during down time the decision made during the event can be reviewed with the mechanics team to make sure there is no breaks and tweak the decision if required to keep everything balanced.
The way Eric and I work is one of us flesh's out an idea and than submitt it to the group for tweaking and feed back. Than the feedback is worked into the new idea until no breaks can be found and it is balanced.
The plot team comes up with great skill ideas which can be submitted to the mechanics team so it can worked into the rules with no breaks.
So what I suggest is the same way you are currently running the game with the addition of a mechanics team to handle the rules so you can focus on plots and politics.
The goal of the mechanics team is to make the rules easy, straight foward, simple, and so they will not produce questions. Idealy the rules would only be a back drop, and the plots would take center stage.
I would galdely volenter as a member of the mechanics team, if that is the direction FH would lie to go.
I agree with Eric in that the plot them should only focus on plot related items and have a mechanics team take care of the rules.
I like the idea of 1 person be the expert in one secition of the rule book, magic marshal, alchemy marshel, etc... so they can make the quick descisions during game, keep track of them of the decisions, and have a centeral person for the PC's to ask questions of that specific area in the rules. This spreads the stress of PC questions over mulitple people and does no inadate one person. Also during down time the decision made during the event can be reviewed with the mechanics team to make sure there is no breaks and tweak the decision if required to keep everything balanced.
The way Eric and I work is one of us flesh's out an idea and than submitt it to the group for tweaking and feed back. Than the feedback is worked into the new idea until no breaks can be found and it is balanced.
The plot team comes up with great skill ideas which can be submitted to the mechanics team so it can worked into the rules with no breaks.
So what I suggest is the same way you are currently running the game with the addition of a mechanics team to handle the rules so you can focus on plots and politics.
The goal of the mechanics team is to make the rules easy, straight foward, simple, and so they will not produce questions. Idealy the rules would only be a back drop, and the plots would take center stage.
I would galdely volenter as a member of the mechanics team, if that is the direction FH would lie to go.
My Thoughts
Aaron
Aaron
RE
LOL all I have to say is LOL
Chris
Chris
Chris
I be one of the gamemasters so e-mail me questions if you have them
I be one of the gamemasters so e-mail me questions if you have them
I'm a committee type of girl for I believe that to many cooks will spoil the soup.
I think all areas however of FH should be observed on this committee. The rules lawyers, the role-players, and things like that. I also recomend umbudsmen to deal with any complaints or problems people are having with the game that NPC staff may not be aware of or to deal with such a situation so the NPCs won't need to in terms of the initial bruntness of the situation.
-Julie
I think all areas however of FH should be observed on this committee. The rules lawyers, the role-players, and things like that. I also recomend umbudsmen to deal with any complaints or problems people are having with the game that NPC staff may not be aware of or to deal with such a situation so the NPCs won't need to in terms of the initial bruntness of the situation.
-Julie
Dead pirate betrayed by Corbyn...ah well least I made him do his own dirty work when he killed me.
I voted committee for a few reasons. First off noone is all knowing and having more than one opinion that truly matters can be a valuable asset. But those opinions have to matter, I suspect that you guys are having a hard time finding a "stage manager" because you're asking someone to do all of the boring, time consuming, mundane stuff, essentially the "work", and have 0 input. You're gonna be very hard pressed to find someone that is willing to do that.
Along with multiple opinions comes a natural balancing of ideas, no 2 people are going to think the same way about everything so ideas are brought out and discussed that may have never even crossed the mind of others. But with that there has to be compromise and a clear vision of what the committee is trying to accomplish.
Humans are creatures of pride, some more than others, and from what I've seen of the people that I've met or know that run organization's of decent size, not neccesarily just LARPS, they have more pride and arrogance than most. It's been my experience that it's hard for someone to truly have an open mind about something when they have the only opinion that matters on the subject. Especially once they have formed a solid opinion, once they have an opinion on a subject under their domain there is no need for them to even entertain other's opinion. Sometimes those people lose touch with what is best for the organiztion or it's clients or members and focus on their "vision" of what the organization should be or be doing or even what it is as percieved by those within it.
A well run and organized committee can be much more consistant than most dictatorships for the simple fact that when the dictator changes, everything usually changes with the new leader. I think you guys realize that you need some organization very badly and are at least trying to remedy that. Things changing completely with each new person running CARPS or aspects of it is probably what has frustrated me the most over the past 3 years of my LARP experience. Having one person in charge usually means that person is the only person that really knows what is going on, so I don't see how a revovling "dictator" is feasable or desirable.
The idea that plot people shoudn't write rules or deal with mechanics is sort of silly to me. As long as the people on the committee have an aptitude for both I don't see the need for a seperate rules team. Plot aspects and the overall vision of where you want the game to be should be taken into consideration when considering rules.
Along with multiple opinions comes a natural balancing of ideas, no 2 people are going to think the same way about everything so ideas are brought out and discussed that may have never even crossed the mind of others. But with that there has to be compromise and a clear vision of what the committee is trying to accomplish.
Humans are creatures of pride, some more than others, and from what I've seen of the people that I've met or know that run organization's of decent size, not neccesarily just LARPS, they have more pride and arrogance than most. It's been my experience that it's hard for someone to truly have an open mind about something when they have the only opinion that matters on the subject. Especially once they have formed a solid opinion, once they have an opinion on a subject under their domain there is no need for them to even entertain other's opinion. Sometimes those people lose touch with what is best for the organiztion or it's clients or members and focus on their "vision" of what the organization should be or be doing or even what it is as percieved by those within it.
A well run and organized committee can be much more consistant than most dictatorships for the simple fact that when the dictator changes, everything usually changes with the new leader. I think you guys realize that you need some organization very badly and are at least trying to remedy that. Things changing completely with each new person running CARPS or aspects of it is probably what has frustrated me the most over the past 3 years of my LARP experience. Having one person in charge usually means that person is the only person that really knows what is going on, so I don't see how a revovling "dictator" is feasable or desirable.
The idea that plot people shoudn't write rules or deal with mechanics is sort of silly to me. As long as the people on the committee have an aptitude for both I don't see the need for a seperate rules team. Plot aspects and the overall vision of where you want the game to be should be taken into consideration when considering rules.
Death=Adder
One of these days...I'm going to cut you into little pieces...
~Pink Floyd~
One of these days...I'm going to cut you into little pieces...
~Pink Floyd~
Erik, the overall vision is still maintained with a rules team since the plot team is the one who gives the rules team the ideas. One team comes up with ideas, the other implements them. Then one team is allowed to go crazy on ideas, and submit the ones they really like.
Honestly, most good ideas are thought up while people are talking about crazy stuff. Without the rules people there, the creative minds can do as they please and not worry about whether blah will be broken. When the rules person is there, ideas get bogged down with feasiability and some of the better ideas may never even come out. Also the opposite is true, if a creative person is in a rules meeting, they bog things down with "what if" crap. This is a very tried and true concept in game design, that I think could very well speed up the completion of the rules and enable more prepared plots in game.
Honestly, most good ideas are thought up while people are talking about crazy stuff. Without the rules people there, the creative minds can do as they please and not worry about whether blah will be broken. When the rules person is there, ideas get bogged down with feasiability and some of the better ideas may never even come out. Also the opposite is true, if a creative person is in a rules meeting, they bog things down with "what if" crap. This is a very tried and true concept in game design, that I think could very well speed up the completion of the rules and enable more prepared plots in game.
Tried and true by whom or what? Never heard of it, never seen in in the 6 or 7 systems I have been involved in. Do you reffer to companies designing table top systems?
Not being sassy, honest question.
Not being sassy, honest question.
Grand High Chancellor of ROBUST UNPLEASANTNESS
...and the 11th commandment is:
"The stupid shall be punished!"
...and the 11th commandment is:
"The stupid shall be punished!"
It's used by many companies designing table top and video games that I've seen. I'm sure there's at least one of the 'higher end' larps using it. And you have to realize is even those systems end up with minor (sometimes major) bugs in their first gens (course this is usually due to investors wanting money more than people not knowing about it)
It's a very low level form of scope management. One low enough that most anyone can benefit from it...
It's a very low level form of scope management. One low enough that most anyone can benefit from it...
O'kay, not a big time LARPer here, but I have had almost two decades of experiance in PnP RPing and RPing organizations, as well as time in a small-press game company soooo....
I hate to urinate in your pressed-grain, breakfast ceriel, but sepperating the creative and mechanic teams ( tho it may sound good on paper ) just does...not...work. Unless you are Sony (tm) the split inhibets both groups ablity to opperate effectively, with the creative team constantly worried what the mechanics "bean-counters" will shoot down next and the mechanics team wondering what hair-brained skeam will be put before them next. Not to mention the confusion this would cause the players if a question comes up..."Gee, do I ask a GM, or do I track down one of the mechanics guys? Who are the mechanics guys, again?"
I believe a parlamentary type system would be in order here, with a group working on all aspects of the game keeping in regular contact and a poor schmuk to take the blame when things go wrong...er...um...to look over every thing.
just an oppinion <shrug>
I hate to urinate in your pressed-grain, breakfast ceriel, but sepperating the creative and mechanic teams ( tho it may sound good on paper ) just does...not...work. Unless you are Sony (tm) the split inhibets both groups ablity to opperate effectively, with the creative team constantly worried what the mechanics "bean-counters" will shoot down next and the mechanics team wondering what hair-brained skeam will be put before them next. Not to mention the confusion this would cause the players if a question comes up..."Gee, do I ask a GM, or do I track down one of the mechanics guys? Who are the mechanics guys, again?"
I believe a parlamentary type system would be in order here, with a group working on all aspects of the game keeping in regular contact and a poor schmuk to take the blame when things go wrong...er...um...to look over every thing.
just an oppinion <shrug>
Ignorance can be fixed...stupid you're stuck with