[Cam] A Question to My Gamers

[ashtoreth]

The success of a LARP is usually measured in its attendance. If 60 people show up to your game on a regular basis, you are successful beyond your wildest dreams. If 30 people show, you're doing really well. If 15 people are your regular attendees, you're not doing half bad. If 6 people come, you might as well pack up and start a table top game

Comments

[kaoticrequiem]

I think a good game requires a compelling story, balanced with the structure of the rules involved. Rules come into it because if it were just a story, we might as well read it in a book or screen, but since it's a game, there's a system by which we can all interact with that story, and change it.

Since the story is made up of plot and characters (and here I mean both NPCs and PCs), it's necessary to have both good people behind the wheel and good people powering the boat.

Story (Plot and Characters to be specific) and Mechanics. These are my requirements for a good game.

The quality of roleplay is marginally important, but I think that almost anyone can act if they have a good sense of the character they're portraying, especially if they care deeply about that character.

[ashtoreth]

Thank you. As usual, your answer is both helpful and well-thought.

To further examine this, though, there are players who prefer interpersonal character interaction more than they enjoy storyteller driven plot. In your opinion, which is more important, or are they of equal importance? And why?

[kaoticrequiem]

In my opinion, interactions with storyteller driven plot is more important. The story I care about is what happens to my character, and frequently, other characters don't interact well with what I think my character is/does/says. JP isn't a bad example: I wanted to play an elder, but no one respected that aspect of him, for whatever reason. He was still very much an elder in terms of power though, and could do things that affected the plot of the story accordingly. That being said, I want to stress two things

[demonix99]

In my measure, success as a game is ultimately measured by how much fun is had by the people who attend.

A game is successful when the players come, play, have fun, and leave wanting to come back.

I just don't feel that with many of the Sonoma domain games anymore.

[ashtoreth]

Can you define "fun"? What makes it "fun"? What aspects do you look for in a game that make it "fun" for you?

[demonix99]

Fun for me is very loosely defined. Often by the mood, direction, and themes presented in the game. But usually it comes down to quality of roleplay, internal conflict, the creation and fulfillment of character goals, and the progression of the storyline

[gothmom]

I agree with demonix99. OMG!? Anyway - I have been to a game with a handful of players where we were engaged and treated like special snowflakes each and every one of us by the storyteller and we had a really super time. We roleplayed our butts off, there were a few npcs actually portrayed by people not be the storyteller - they were in costume and the scared the bejezus out of us and when the time came to end the game, the ST asked if we wanted to quit or game on - we were all GAME ON!

We can all roleplay if we wish to with each other. The complaint I've got with the Sonoma game is that certain players actively shun others. I've been shunned for a long time, but now they have gotten to the point of seeing us "outsiders" show up and they don't come to game, they go to the game across campus instead.

Its not worth a 2 hour drive to be insulted like that. They don't seem to care enough to tell us to our faces we're persona non grata.

[ashtoreth]

My statement that a game's success is measured by its player base is a generalization. I have seen some LARPs that have been a great deal of fun with only a few players, and some that have been terrible with a lot of players. However, when STs are counting coup and comparing their games to another; or, even when they are pitching their games to prospective players, the size of the game is one of the first three facts that comes out of their mouths. Body count measures "success" but not necessarily whether the game is "good", although the two can certainly be attributed to one another. If a lot of people show up every week, they're getting something out of it

[demonix99]

Amen Sandra. I have always enjoyed your company. And were it not for the fact that ICly, I find Tim's characters worthy of being set on FIRE. I'm sure I would interact with him more.

The problem isn't you. Its a perception. I can't think of many that appreciate power-scale difference in any setting with other PC's. To invest 3 years in 1 characters and then look over to see another guy that has double or more experience feels cheapening.

Personally, I would love to have you and Tim come up to our troupe games. (especially Hunter) But I know that a 2 hour drive for a game that isn't as a dedicated investment as the cam is daunting at best and disappointing at worst.

[cyranocyrano]

I've got to go with the 'fun' aspect as well, but 'fun should be further defined in order to be a useful metric.
And for me, 'fun' equals character work and good role play. There are supporting tiers--costuming helps maintain that illusion that I'm actually a golem spawned from an evil rabbi's laboratory or whatever, good plot gives me something for my character to react to rather than roleplaying hanging out at Chandni Bar and looking cool, other good roleplayers are essential because it's boring developing your character in a series of monologues.
But in the end, if I've had fun then it's probably because I've learned something about my character, or I've made progress in their development, or I've had a chance to really dig into them and play them hard.
You might have guessed. I came into role playing from theater.

[ashtoreth]

So, for you, character development and player interaction are the parts of a game that make it fun? Where does game plot enter into it, or does it?

[cyranocyrano]

Game plot is definitely one of the supporting pillars--plot facilitates character growth, it encourages interaction with other characters, it provides a shared history for characters relating to each other, and it creates a history more likely to generate emotional depth to a character.

[cyranocyrano]

Having said this, I make an anecdotal remark about Size isn't Everything. The first non-WoD LARP I was in, early sessions had about ten players. And there was a lot of GM attention. And it was one of the best LARP experiences I've had.
Over time, more people heard about the cool game we were playing, the game got bigger, and it was less fun.

[mask]

Whether it is 6 members at a game or 600, I have found that I enjoy myself when I get to role play and have my role play be challenging. Quality over quantity, perhaps?

I love the Camarilla because I have not been subjected to the stupidity of the Disney Princess or Final Fantasy character who happens to be a glittery hawt vampire as well. Of course, now that I've said that...

Well, there was the taco munching retard in Mage, but I gave that a wide berth.

I've played in table top games before and whether it was D&D, Traveler or Masquerade; I've found the role play to be minimal at best.

To boil it all down again, a successful game to me is the quality of the role play.

[ashtoreth]

As I said to gothmom "success" works on a different metric than "good" or "fun." That being said, thank you for weighing in. I appreciate the input.