sorcerer: larping

[kwill]

hi all,

one of the books mentions sorcerer larp rules/guidelines, but I haven't been able to find them on the sorcerer site, am I just blind or are they somehwere else?

[Ron Edwards]

Hi David,

That would be "Masks," by Gareth Hanrahan, which he ran as a LARP sometime back in, geez, 1998 or something like that. I was under the impression that I still had the zip file with all the character handouts in it available at the Downloads page.

... until I just discovered that it's not there. H'm. I shall hunt for the file and see whether I can get it re-instated.

To be absolutely clear, though, it's not a Sorcerer LARP-rules set. It's pretty much a standard Mind's Eye Theater type LARP, just with lots of demons and sorcerers (one named "Jon Edwards" as I recall).

Best,
Ron

[kwill]

sounds interesting

so that means a LARPing mini-supplement is a possibility? (no promises until at least next year)

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

I was thinking of continuing with this before I got all GNS-y elsewhere.

I have to confess, LARP as an activity completely leaves me cold. I am almost entirely disinclined to participate or even pay attention to it, and I tend to think of my friends who both role-play and LARP as being very much in my hobby in the former, and quite out of it in the latter (i.e. doing something else).

Sorcerer was written with absolutely no connection to LARPing, which was a little out-of-line for a game written primarily in 1994-95, and playtested into its commercial form in 1995-97. The line being taken by most games at the time, especially ones set in modern-day or semi-like modern-day, was, "And when you really want to play a grown-up game, it goes like this," and then followed by the LARP instructions (which were always the same in all the books).

When I took Sorcerer in its book form to GenCon 2001, some people asked me if it included LARP rules. I pointed out that all the LARP rules in any RPG were always the same, so what difference would it make? It wasn't a point to generate a sale, and to this day, I'm not especially sympathetic to the idea that I'm obliged to appeal to hobbyists who, as far as I can tell, aren't doing my hobby.

So what's all this mean? My point in this post is that I'm perfectly open to the Sorcerer LARP rules. But I don't think that they'll be in any way similar to the role-playing rules. I'm fairly skeptical that consistently Narrativist LARPing is a reasonable goal anyway (local and occasional, yes). I'd be very curious to see what people would generate for these rules, and I suspect it'd be as different from the standard Mind's-Eye-Theater style rules as Sorcerer is from most role-playing rules.

Let's discuss it. I'm interested to see what people think a Sorcerer LARP, which really nailed the same themes as expressed in playing the role-playing game, would be like.

Best,
Ron

[sirogit]

As an occasinial larper/freeform roleplayer, I can say that I am truly disheartened by the elitism thereof.

Let's see... I really liked Jared's rules for a vampire larp.

This is a little out there, but say Sorcerers had Stamina, Will, Lore tokens, when in opposistion with someone else, you picked a number of relevent tokens, slapped them on your hand, whoever has more heads wins. He than gives you up to his spent tokens in your heads, and discards the rest. You can use those in a following contest if the action is linked.

Humanity checks would always be with just one token, heads = success tails = failure.  

The biggest points I think would be the presentation of demons(Which could really be intereasting.) and the rules for dealing with NPCs/the outside world, which would benefit from being kept abstract, but important.

[kwill]

My point in this post is that I'm perfectly open to the Sorcerer LARP rules. But I don't think that they'll be in any way similar to the role-playing rules.

I must point out that the LARPing that *I* do doesn't do much by way of rules, more Actor-Stance freeform guided by GMs - within the context of demons & humanity, though, there's definitely room for some kind of system (and, like sirogit points out, the rp system with Will, Lore etc would serve as a foundation or at least reference point)

I'd love to discuss GNS, LARPing and developing this, but my net time is very limited at the moment; I'll watch what others have to say with interest

[Peregrine Dace]

My point in this post is that I'm perfectly open to the Sorcerer LARP rules. But I don't think that they'll be in any way similar to the role-playing rules.

I must point out that the LARPing that *I* do doesn't do much by way of rules, more Actor-Stance freeform guided by GMs - within the context of demons & humanity, though, there's definitely room for some kind of system (and, like sirogit points out, the rp system with Will, Lore etc would serve as a foundation or at least reference point)

I'd love to discuss GNS, LARPing and developing this, but my net time is very limited at the moment; I'll watch what others have to say with interest

Yeah, i get the impression that SA LARPing in general is very unlike forn LARPing.
PD

[Ron Edwards]

Hi PD,

Could you provide some details about the differences you perceive?

Best,
Ron

[jburneko]

Hello,

I've been thinking about this lately myself.  Like Ron, I'm not the biggest fan of LARPs.  I've played in a few LARPs and while not my thing I certainly see their potential.  I think their potential has been mostly realized as an arena for social (Amber Throne Wars) and Physical (Foam Rubber Weapons) Gamism.  I actually consider the latter to be an under appreciated sport.

So, I've turned my head to thinking about Narrativist LARPs with Sorcerer in mind.  For rules, I'd probably just use some form of the rules I presented here:

//http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=6877

What I think would be key really, is set up.  Two of my favorite movies of all time are 12 Angry Men and Night of the Living Dead, which is just 12 Angry Men with Zombies.  I greatly admire intemacy in drama which is why I think plays are really my favorite entertainment format.  So, to me, Sorcerer LARP would just be 12 Angry Men with Demons.

There are probably other ways to set things up but here's what I'd do.  First of all LARPs are often an excuse to get MORE players together.  LARPs usually run 10 to 20 people and I've even heard of LARPs that ran upwards of 100 people.  I don't think that's the case with Sorcerer LARP.  I'd go 5 to 6 people tops.

I'd turn the relationship map concept inward.  I'd add the following constraint to character creation: Each player must have at least one family or sexual connection to another player.  Each player must also have at least one secondary conection that may be a "weaker" link such as a business parternership.

I'd also move the Kicker up from the personal level to the group level.  So, collectively the players come up with a single Kicker that has significant impact on ALL of the characters.  Also, I'd have the group agree on a single locale for the action to take place, a diner, a church, an office building, someone's home, etc.

For further prep I'd take all the meat generated by the above and create a kind of backstory that the demons are all intimately involved with.  I'd then go get 5 or 6 more people and share this information, in full, with them.  They would play the demons and are the counter-point to the multiple GMs recommended for most other LARPs.  If necessary, I'd get one or two other people to play non-Sorcerous "NPCs" again multiple GMs who are in on the entire backstory.

So, ultimately, you WOULD have 10 to 15 people like in a normal LARP but the proportions would be reversed.  Normally, you've got like 10 PCs and 5 GMs.  Here, you would have 5 PCs and 10 GMs.

Then here's the most radically different thing I would do.  One GM would NOT play a character they would be left to observe.  Things can get pretty heated in LARP so their job would be to call "Time" whenever they spot a conflict.  What would be different is that EVERYONE would stop what they were doing and pay attention.  The GM would outline the conflict as they percieved it.  ANYONE could then "get in" on the conflict, if they wanted.  This would be the equivalent of the "Free and Clear" stage as Ron calls it in Trollbabe.  The diceless system described in the other thread would be employed.  The conflict's resolution would be discussed and agreed upon and play would resume as normal.

Any player, including the other "GMs"  may request that the observer GM call "Time" but that GM has final say.

Yeah, that's how I'd do Sorcerer LARP.  It's odd but this all looks very Gamist.  I've even got a traditional Referee figure but I think if everyone is on the same page creatively this would work out well.

By the way, Ron has created two of the best LARP candidate scenarios already and I bet he doesn't even know it.  The "Lincoln High" demo is perfect.  It even has a group Kicker, "We've all been invited to our High School reunion."  Also, the In Utero scenario is perfect as well.  Again, it has a group Kicker, "The family that was torn apart is uniting for the first time in 10 years."  BOTH have single locales for their action and BOTH have a small number of key NPCs for GMs to play.

I'd REALLY REALLY REALLY like to run In Utero as a LARP.  It's actually the scenario that put the idea in my head in the first place.

Jesse

[Peregrine Dace]

Hi PD,

Could you provide some details about the differences you perceive?

Best,
Ron

It seems from what I've read that in other parts of the world LARPs tend to be longer running with more GM poking of players, characters and events and the inclusion of GM run NPCs.
South African LARPing tends to single evening smaller LARPS.  Perhaps 10 to 15 people.  1 or 2 GMs and as little GM character or GM player interaction as possible.  Players simply get a character with backstory and a reson for being there, usually with one or two loose goals involving other characters and get to it.
We've had some experimentation with bigger two night LARPs but they're pretty hellish for the GM/writers.
Perhaps kwill has some other comments.
Peregrine

[Judd]

I have been to one LARP in my life that was really competently done.  It was a boffa LARP that was classy.

If I did a Sorcerer LARP I would want to tailor the world to fit a LARP scenario.  Demons would be mostly human looking.  Perhaps they would wear masks, like garish masqerade masks so we could know who they were.

I'd make magic have to take place in a certain room or area of the LARP, and assign a portion of the NPC's there to react to the Summonings and such.  I picture some kind of take on Ron's Art Deco Sorcery.  There would have to be some kind of in-game equivalent of the River, a place where Summoning and Binding all happens.

There is something in my head about Demons being the only ones in the LARP with weapons on hand.  Everyone who played a PC would have to bring a friend who would play a Demon but they would be assigned to another player at the game, mask included by the game's staff (but players are encouraged to bring a mask and would probably get more points towards their character for making one and bringing it).

Kickers would be interesting.  I'd probably do the Kick-approval process over e-mail before the game, or perhaps have a meeting for the LARP, wherein we discussed it.

This all said, table-top is my preferred medium.  LARP does feel like a different animal to me but this is a fun exercise.  I think Sorcerer would make a neat LARP but I wouldn't want to run it like the Vampire, WoD LARP's but add Sorcerer's player-centered theory to the boffa LARP with a small group of players who weren't there to only stick-jock.

Fun.

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

Now we're getting somewhere. Between Jesse, PD, and Judd ... this looks like something I'd like to see developed. I could even see holding a Sorcerer LARP based on these principles at GenCon next year, with any luck refined through some trial runs before then.

Best,
Ron

[kwill]

composed before judd & ron's replies, so part 1 is more on SA LARPing:

I'd describe SA LARPing as successful Illusionist play, that is, the GMs have an investment in particular events and work towards them - these events may be outcomes (increasingly rare) or choices (my preference), but generally in the adventure module mindset of "and once they've done that they're sure to do this"

I do see potential for Narrativist play, but can't see immediately how to bring it about (see my description of Consequences below for some ideas)

Perry wrote:
Perhaps 10 to 15 people. 1 or 2 GMs and as little GM character or GM player interaction as possible.

in the game GMs mainly handle PCs interaction with the setting, eg special props (eg computer systems, telephone calls to NPCs) or describing scenes when PCs wander away from the play area (eg explore the house/spaceship/etc(*))

(*) much creativity has gone into setting up scenarios where PCs don't or can't do this

GMs are typically the LARP writers, ie they wrote the character sheets and background, and brief the players before play (ie, players confirm they have understood the character sheet) thus they really have a huge influence, although as Perry says during play there's a hands-off just-facilitating approach

hmmm... like winding the machine up and seeing how it goes (I speak here as a writer, GM of my own and others' LARPs, and player)

finally, on this note, LARPs are controlled by their writers; in instances where non-writers run the LARP, they have always (in my experience) previously played the LARP; personally, I've usually played, co-GM'd (with writers) and then independently(**) GM'd others' LARPs

(**) ie, independently of writers, not on my own!

Perry wrote:
Players simply get a character with backstory and a reson for being there, usually with one or two loose goals involving other characters and get to it.

I'd say this is atypical of play, or the "mature" approach to play - lists of goals for characters and intricate subplots tying character to character were my initial exposure to play and writing - my attempts at a more freeform attitude (ie, you decide for yourself what your character wants to do) have fizzled

this may be a difference between Cape Town play and Joburg play - Perry?

the LARP I still rate as my most enjoyable to play was Consequences, written by a Cape Town team - this did the "mature" approach to the hilt, pulled off the freeform attitude successfully and had only one prop gimmick (reactions to art on display were described in an at-the-game handout), GMs provided two or three Bangs (phone calls and an NPC visit) - I spent most of my evening in Actor Stance not just "being my character" but generating a meaningful story with my character - this was partly the player mix, but mostly good writing (ie, defining what drove the character)

aside: there have been what I assume where player-creates-character MET
Vampire LARPs run - Cape Town By Night, Joburg By Night, I don't recall if Durban By Night ever happened - but I was never motivated/able to join - these fizzled mainly due to GM frazzling as I recall

so that's SA LARPing from my pov, subject to wild objections by Perry

--

given that Sorcerer doesn't lend itself to pre-written modules I don't know that pre-written LARPs are a suitable medium, but in the SA context it's hard to get enough people into a small pre-written game, let alone getting them to generate characters

a big question for Sorcerer LARPing is how to present demons, PCs or NPCs? obviously this depends also on the demon/Humanity/etc definition

if, going strictly by tabletop play, the only PCs are Sorcerers, you must end up with a higher than usual GM:player ration as Jesse describes (gawd, what if someone brings in another demon?) - this is unusual but quite interesting, the dynamic becomes more of a performance put on for the players

more comments on Jesse's ideas once I've read his other thread (wow, Judd, good ideas - in a similar direction you could make the interpretation of sorcerery more abstract with the different locations and all)

[Judd]

Just throwing more LARP thoughts out there.

What I don't like about Vampire LARP's in general is that the moment when the game is supposed to get really exciting, when a physical conflict occurs, the game becomes incredibly boring.

Boffa fighting at least captures some of the adrenaline of combat.  I realize that alot of boffa LARP's are set up in the kill things and take their stuff school of thought but I don't think they have to be.

Without that interaction between the Sorcerer and the Demon the game doesn't work.  That is why I am against amorphous Demons that a LARP doesn't have the special effects to pull off.  I think they need to be a definite physical, interactive and eerie presence in the game.  Prepping the Demon players thoroughly is important for this to work as would giving them a unifying costume that established their eeriness and let players know who the Demons are.  

I am of the opinion that Demons should be treading the line between NPC and PC in a Sorcerer LARP.

I have been in boffa LARP's where people who wore white headbands were Out of Game.  Then I played in a game where there were no white headbands and it turned me around.  I played in a LARP in Massachussetts called Atlas and the setting wasa cyber-punk post-apocolypse.  Rather than wearing white-headbands, the storytellers and NPC people wore red workman's helmets.  If you interacted with them they would act like people who worked for the corporation, in a rush to get an errand finished.

It kept everyone in game and it was a cue to let the players know what was going on.

At one point a friend and I wanted to just chat about real life stuff.  We hadn't seen each other in years.  We walked out into the woods, so not to disturb anyone else's experience and chatted.  At some point some folks in red workman's helmets came by and said they had to do some electrical work.  We knew that this meant they had to set up a module and left them alone.

It worked.

Some thoughts.

[Eero Tuovinen]

The mask idea is a nice one... I could see a functional Sorcerer larp in the historical-social tradition where demons were represented with such stylized techniques.

The best way to construct it would probably be similar to many tabletop Sorcerer games: construct a web of human relations without any supernatural influence. This is simple and conventional in larping, and will itself produce an interesting larp. Give it the one usual twist, like basing it on Wuthering Hill (meaning players get to dress up and talk funny), and that part of the game is all set.

To make it Sorcerer, we need demons and moral conflicts they faciliate. I'd visualize demon players as exotic and symbolic characters, breaking the usual larp logic. All demons dress by their specifics, but they all use the same mask system, where the type of mask gives relevant information. A blank mask for an invisible demon, for instance, and a ravening one for one not bound to a sorcerer. And so on, depending on the setting and specifics. Probably premade masks by the organizers, to ensure uniformity.

Inactive players, NPCs and such could easily play demons, as they are masked. You could even go with constantly changing demon players, where demon statistics are kept on a scorecard and the player changes at opportune moments, making demons truly incomprehensible.

I don't all in all see much trouble with this, it would work. How much of the Sorcerer punch it'd have would largely depend on the scenario - the key techniques of Sorcerer are metagame narrativist after all, and nontranslatable to the actual play. I'd focus largely on the allegorical and metaphorical visuals of the demons and supernatural to make the game interesting, drawing horror from the interaction of demon and sorcerer. A significant part of the characters would be mundies, I think, as larping would draw much on the social implications.