PvP in LARP

From: www.knightrealms.com/forum/Off-Topic/838...-in-larp.html#133998

Templar Aldric wrote: I would be interested in hearing about a way pvp would not be detrimental. I consider the social opposition a form of pvp, I suppose. But when it comes to actual strikes against pcs, I cant see that ending well and without some bad blood on both sides.

I can explain how PvP is not detrimental with one question: At its core, how is PvP different than PvE?
And the answer to that question is: It’s not. PvP and PvE are the same… when PvP is done right.

To fully explain my position, there needs to be some clear definitions.
Firstly, there are two types of thought when it come to PvP: there is the abundant, and oft thought of, Online PvP and the less understood, and often forgotten, LARP PvP.
Online PvP is popular in MMOs and MOBAs (e.g. World of Warcraft, League of Legends) where the entire point of PvP is to eliminate the other faction. This is born from the fact that there is no other way to interact with the other faction. The game’s only PvP design is combat (or Physical PvP, which I will explain later) and that is the only way that factions ever interact, when allowed. And in games where there is a social aspect (i.e. you can talk to the other faction), there is no consequence for PvP, since it is the ultimate end goal of the game design. This idea of Online PvP where the only way to accomplish anything is through the outright destruction of the opposition is nothing but detrimental to a LARP.
But to add a little perspective, Online PvP is also the method in which most PvE encounters go. Many Player Characters (PCs) will just outright “kill” Non-player Characters (NPCs) because there is no consequence to these actions. After all, NPCs are meant to “die,” right? There only for the PCs enjoyment, in whatever way that seems to manifest? While the answer to these questions is "yes" in a video game, that is not the case at a LARP.
LARP PvP is difficult, and it involves both In-Game (IG) character actions and Out-of-Game (OOG) player actions. LARP PvP consists of two aspects: Physical PvP and Social PvP.
Physical PvP is pretty self-explanatory; it is the physical (or combative) contact between characters using IG mechanics that can result in the “death” of a PC. Phyiscal PvP is solely an IG mechanic, and should be restricted to such, since two players should never make physical contact without clear and expressed consent. Unlike in Online PvP, Physical PvP at a LARP can be catastrophic since, at a game such a Knight Realms, a character is limited to the number of time in which it may “die” and having an unwanted or uneventful PC death is a waste both IG and OOG. That is not to say PCs shouldn't ever "die" when it's unwanted, it's more so to say that the PC death should leave the player with a positive story.
Social PvP is the roleplay between two conflicting characters. As such, it should remain between characters and not spill over between players. This should be avoided by insuring all things said are in reference to the character and game world, and not the player (but that is another discussion). There is no way to avoid Social PvP in a game system that allows different factions as conflict will be a main factor in the RP.

The main thing someone has to remember about LARP PvP is: You have to see this person, as a person, and everything you do has a direct impact on their life. They aren’t a nameless, faceless toon whom you may or may not ever encounter again. They are an actual flesh-and-blood person who wants to be there as much as you do and enjoy the same things you do, and you should want to see them month after month partaking in the same activity you are. As such, if you want to engage in Phyiscal PvP…
TALK TO THE OTHER PERSON ABOUT IT!
Pull them aside, OOG, and talk to them. Inform them that your character has a problem with their character and create a story with it, open an OOG dialogue so you both get enjoyment from the interactions, can form an understanding that it's between characters and not players; use it to entertain yourselves, use it to entertain others. Most importantly: if an agreement can’t be made, don’t engage in Physical PvP. Walk away from the interaction.

Just as NPCs aren’t sent out with the expressed directive of “killing” a PC (Okay, maybe sometimes they are but that is few and far between and normally the PC is given a bit of a heads up), a PC shouldn’t just “kill” another PC because they can. Just because PvP is allowed, does not mean it should be exercised. There is a huge power gap at Knight Realms, and those on the high end should be a little more OOG conscious of their actions. An example: As Dennis, I severely crossed another PC, and in a real medieval-fantasy world he had every right to kill me; however, because of the level difference, he could have killed Dennis in a matter of seconds. But he did not, we talked about it OOG, came to some PvP ground rules (btw, if you ever find my PC stumped and tied to a tree in the middle of the night, please save me), and proceeded with the character interactions. Because of our OOG conversations, I am confident that he will not outright “kill” my PC, and I am equally as confident that if he does initiate Physical PvP that it will leave me with a positive roleplay experience.

((moved from previous thread!))
www.knightrealms.com/forum/Off-Topic/838...-in-larp.html#134026


I think Pvp can be done well, and adds a level of realism and consequence to actions and RP in game. Fear of actual danger or consequence adds meaning to our characters deaths, and conviction to their actions when our lives are really in danger, either through physical challenges or social (eg: standing to a light/dark clergy/sorc god/monser)

Learning characters are volatile or actually dangerous is apart of the experience and can add to the complexity and depth of the world and RP.

There is a point in my opinion where that type of conflict can be un-enjoyable for players, and could be easily solved by being able to "flag" yourself for PVP.

But pvp is a two way street, there are those like me who really enjoy the threat, the complexity, and extra layer to the game, the ability to defend my honor, god or safety at a moments notice, the fear of an assassin in the night, really adds a special quality to the game for me.
With that said there are the latter, and I would maybe even venture to say the majority(?) who would rather not have the looming threat of an assassin, or the chance of a conversation going sour to the point of violence or death.

A solution? A flag of some sorts. A purple wrap on the wrist or something of the sorts. Because conflict (arguments, and slander IG) without consequence (regardless of the faction) really isnt what develops in depth and interesting RP (Imo of course :) . Unless of course PVP is blanket removed from the game, which would change the expectations and gameplay of pvp-ers and non.

I am a big fan of treating NPCs and PCs the same. They are characters. They are played by players. So that makes them Player Characters. Sure, an NPC has been given motivations by the game world and Storytellers instead of just by the player, but the player is still bringing the character to life.

Now then, rarely will a short term NPC being killed (PvE) cause the player of that character any long term distress, with a PC being killed (PvP style) can actually put the Player out quite a bit of money because of the costuming and props they have invested time in. It can also sour a players desire to return to the game. It can also ruin friendships.

But character conflict done well can also MAKE friendships stronger. I like what has been said before in this thread, just wanted to add on a bit more.

Larps are about players working together to have a good time, ultimately. In the end, if everyone is having fun and goes away fulfilled then it doesn't really matter if you were stabbing each other in the back or confounding each other's plans or arresting each other or fighting side by side against a horde of your friends who happen to be skeletons for 4 hours. Just take care of your fellow players, check with them to make sure they are on board and having a good time and then do whatever makes the most fun for the most people.

To expand a little on what Joe said, character conflict done well can make interactions more poignant, intense and cause significant character development. The distinction I make is that Character Conflict is not necessarily physical PvP. Social PvP is a thing as well, with the fight being fought over ideology or reputation rather than hitpoints. That right there is what roleplaying is to me.

This thread originally started over my wanting to discuss Religious roleplay, specifically Light vs. Dark, and as PvP was considered a consequence this thread was separated out. I am not sure if you can really, as the social pvp aspect is the meat of religious roleplay.

It took me some time to really think about this, and I finally settled in what I want to say. This is meant to be a general consideration of the topic, and not a specific analysis of KR. Please note that when I refer to experiences with pvp, I'm not always referring to KR, but other larps I've played, helped run, as well as some stories I know from close friends.

To me, pvx means players trying to get rid of or kill x. Everything else is rp or story.

I do not consider huge theological debates or political arguments pvp or pve. They are the social equivalent of sparing or having a contest. What would cross the line to social pvp for me would be social interaction aimed at having the person executed, exiled, or stripped of all ig authority or position to the point the character is no longer fun to be played (I can expand on that if need be).

Because of this, I see all pvp as something that should be at a bare minimum, and only if the rp truly drives it. I agree with what has been said about consequences, but I have also experienced my fair share of pvp because "it's fun" or "because I can". If someone is robbing you, should they take a life tag just because they can? Is it OK for a barbarian to drop and kill a mage because they used magic on them? Is it sufficient to say "I'm making a psycho who wants to inspire terror by randomly killing people?" when pvp aimed at removing characters from the game (I consider any taking of a tag an attempt to remove the character from the game) is not based in something substantial it harms fun, rather than supports it. Pvp not aimed at killing or removing tags (knocking out our wounding the person you rob, but not killing then or barbarian drops the mage, but get him healed) can hold just as much impact if not more.

Even when there may be some basis in rp, the power levels and realities of the game should be taken into account. There are characters significantly more powerful than others,who can easily pvp someone with no chance of resistance. Are you comfortable with the possibility that your 20th level character may have unknowingly crossed or insulted a level 100 assassin, who can easily take all of your lives while you sleep, and so you have to make a new character? Do all characters have to make pvp concessions in their build, because others may choose to pvp them? Sadly I have known instances where players make their pvp decisions because of what they know about their targets sheet or card oog, be it level, defenses or lists.
In one of my first larps, I was subject to unbalanced, unjustified pvp aimed at killing my character ... A high level Warrior landed I had screwed his people out of their share of money 2 events prior when he wasn't there. (the gold divide wasn't even, and in KR terms 8 people each got 10 gold, I took 11 as leader) He proceeded to attempt to kill all of us on the spot, and only failed because ree had armor and played dead with 1 body and ran for help. The player demanded a card check to see if she was cheating.

Also, when deadly pvp is rampant a game needs to have methods for responses. It is not sufficient to have 'always get away with it' type skills, or have no skills or rules to allow for investigation. I know of one Sci first larp that fell apart for just that. Stealth and setup skills allowed murders to be performed unseen by traps cameras or other security, and the game had no rules for any sort of investigation, so no assassin could be caught. On the other hand I have seen games where divination, S crying, fortune telling, advanced tracking, deduction/research skills and the like have been allowed to pursue pvp, making for fun aftermath regardless of whether the per is caught. . But if characters can be built who can pvp with no repricussions because they can always get away untraceable, it becomes merely a system for griefing or trolling.

Just my two cents.

Cyndra Stagsblood wrote: ((moved from previous thread!))
www.knightrealms.com/forum/Off-Topic/838...-in-larp.html#134026

There is a point in my opinion where that type of conflict can be un-enjoyable for players, and could be easily solved by being able to "flag" yourself for PVP.

A solution? A flag of some sorts. A purple wrap on the wrist or something of the sorts. Because conflict (arguments, and slander IG) without consequence (regardless of the faction) really isnt what develops in depth and interesting RP (Imo of course :) .

I second this. If you're up for spontaneous PvP, then the obligation should be on you to wear a flag of some sorts to indicate such. This precludes New Players who may or may not know, and takes the responsibility off of people who are OOG totally not OK with PvP.

Something that I've heard about enough of, I have to say, is shuffling.

Shuffling is when a character decides they hate another so much that they will kill them over and over again until they don't come back again.

This doesn't happen often, I must admit, in fact, I don't know of an actual example of it. But I have been threatened teased with this in an OOG manner many times.

Might I remind us, however, that, on our first tag, we all assume IC that death is perma-death? It is only when we return from the Phokus that we understand this not to be the case, that we are special. So shouldn't the assumption, when a character dies, be that when they die, they are actually dead? Because you never know how old a soul is, or whether that soul is special.

There should be no case where a player immediately walks to a Phokus and waits for the victim to come back. And if they do, than they'd best be waiting for the rest of the god damned event IC after the last tag is lost, whether they learn OOG that the last tag was lost or not. Because if their assumption is that the character will come back, then what is there IC motivation to leave their guardpost? Who is relieving them? Would anyone relieve them and faithfully guard the Phokus on the behalf of the killer's vendetta? There is no mechanic IG for knowing whether or not a character is truly dead for good, as far as the Phokus can help. I don't even think anyone IG knows the limits of the soul and the Phokus. I doubt anyone could know IG.

The worst part of PvP is direct OOG threat. It's just unnecessary. The best part of PvP is what was said earlier: the reasonable possibility of being assassinated in your sleep. The reasonable possibility of breaking into a barfight due to the exchange of a few choice words. The key is reasonable possibility: nothing is set in stone, good or bad, for either character. It's all decided based on IC interactions, culminating in spontaneous physical violence. The best way to make fruitful PvP is to do what Dennis' player said: pull the other player decide, recap, and talk about what's cool in their interactions to come. Make everything clear, concise, consensual, and most importantly, fun.

Lux wrote:
Might I remind us, however, that, on our first tag, we all assume IC that death is perma-death? It is only when we return from the Phokus that we understand this not to be the case, that we are special. So shouldn't the assumption, when a character dies, be that when they die, they are actually dead? Because you never know how old a soul is, or whether that soul is special.

While I'm not debating your conclusions about not greifing or 'perma killing' - I have to question where you are getting this definitive statement. My character was informed very early on about the Phokus, and believed he would come through. As one who can bring people through, he's also assured others that he believes them to have the strength to come back and what not. Not that he's telling them to risk their lives recklessly, but I don't see how you can say what everyone assumes 'on their first tag'.

Fair, one can believe such, but it still isn't 100% known to the character until the first return. I'll relent that!

Your spirit must be brought through the Phokus by someone attuned to it. For this to work the attuned person must be in on it or at the very least witnessing it. Further, a spirit is not under any obligation to immediately return to a phokus they just died near. It has the option of waiting for a safer time to be brought through.

Killing another player character is a serious act, which the system needs to regulate, as Jason points out, there must be a reasonable expectation of consequences for it. After two years of play my opinion is that the system needs tweaking in this regard.

Templar Aldric wrote: Killing another player character is a serious act, which the system needs to regulate, as Jason points out, there must be a reasonable expectation of consequences for it. After two years of play my opinion is that the system needs tweaking in this regard.

As a newer player who just lost a tag at his third event in his sleep, I can attest to this (assuming it was PvP, I never got all of the details OOG from anyone, but from what I heard it sounded like a PvP situation). However, I can also say that I can't think of a very good IG system to punish PvP without drawing a clear line between a PC and an NPC. I find value in treating PCs and NPCs the same, as I'm sure most do, but it'd be difficult to reasonably punish a PC in-game without making clear the line between a PC and an NPC.

Is player killing a big issue at KR? I haven't heard of it being a major problem, though I haven't been here long at all.

Its not a huge issue, but lately its become more prevalent. Jason brings up a good point regarding Larps that do not regulate a good balance between escape or evasion skills, or even use of Alibi or Contacts, and detection skills such as tracking or divination. Without a reasonable fear of legal consequences there is the concern in any Larp that player killing will be more frequent.

Templar Aldric wrote: Its not a huge issue, but lately its become more prevalent. ...Without a reasonable fear of legal consequences there is the concern in any Larp that player killing will be more frequent.

Both of these are very good points. There is something to be said for the system that IG supports laws and legal action against murders and the sort, but is basically never brought up IG.

LFG: more IG police! lol

Cyndra Stagsblood wrote: LFG: more IG police! lol

We are recruiting.

TheBardAbides wrote:

Cyndra Stagsblood wrote: LFG: more IG police! lol

We are recruiting.

It is of my opinion that...

For the IG Police aka The Baronial Guard to be effective, 3 things needs to happen.
1) Characters need to report to the Guard when an IG law is broken or is believed to have been broken
2) The Guard needs to investigate said reporting, not just brush it off or ignore it (as I have seen done on MANY occasions)
3) Characters need to stop forming vigilante groups. Let the Guard do their jobs. If someone, as a player, wants to hunt criminals, their character should join the Guard.

IG Law exists for a reason, and as players, we should respect* that.

- Devin


*respect does not necessarily mean follow in this case

Although, I must say, that a cruddy enforcing body makes for some great roleplay! I love not being able to rely on the Guard all of the time.

The question we need to ask our selves is whether the current behavior of the guard fits the sentiment of the current Lordship. And I think it does, for the most part. Perhaps something to supplement this would be the implementation of Land-aligned guard groups, that report to the Baronial Guard, but answer to the Embassies first. That way, some of our "better" Lords would have a more profound influence on the law enforcement than they currently do.

But at this point, we're OOG suggesting things that need to be brought up IG, without OOG motivation.

Dennis Brand wrote:

TheBardAbides wrote:

Cyndra Stagsblood wrote: LFG: more IG police! lol

We are recruiting.

It is of my opinion that...

For the IG Police aka The Baronial Guard to be effective, 3 things needs to happen.
1) Characters need to report to the Guard when an IG law is broken or is believed to have been broken
2) The Guard needs to investigate said reporting, not just brush it off or ignore it (as I have seen done on MANY occasions)
3) Characters need to stop forming vigilante groups. Let the Guard do their jobs. If someone, as a player, wants to hunt criminals, their character should join the Guard.

IG Law exists for a reason, and as players, we should respect* that.

- Devin


*respect does not necessarily mean follow in this case

You makes great points. #1 and #3 are the biggest issues hurting the guard currently.

Also just a reminder vigilante groups are also engaging in breaking the IG laws just as much as the original offender does.

Also as Jeff said we are recruiting

A small suggestion:
I could be stepping out of place here, and it may be because I carry around a staff instead of a sword, but as a newer player I never really knew that the Guard was ever recruiting until now. It may have been at the back of my mind, but I feel as though it would be beneficial to run some recruitment drives or something of the sort, especially considering all of the new players.

I could be totally wrong, I could just have missed something (which is highly likely considering how much is going on at any one point in time), but that's a newer player's two cents on the matter.

I think alot of people can feel that the Guard is brushing them off, when we dont immediately divulge what we are doing to them at the moment they ask. We are under the same time constraints as other players, we have NPC shift, participate in Mods ect. We are players too, remember.

We honestly want to solve crimes and keep the peace. Naturally some are better at it than others. Me? Total crap in investigations. However, that being said there is always room for improvement. Segue: recruitment.

Recruitment is pretty sensitive as we regularly have to weed out recruits with less than honorable intent. We are always looking for members, but not always openly. Howeer, if you are interested, when you hear an announcement for a Guard meeting, show up. Alternatively ask a Guardsmen to introduce you to the officers.

As we moved onto Law Enforcement as PvP, it might be important to note, we avoid setting up for pvp as much as anyone. Looking over the rules you may realize minor infractions are taken care of by fines, public ridicule and helping in the kitchen. Hardly sentences that require a lethal resistance to. More major stuff is usually pvp related in the first place. Then, we expect resistance. But with the disparity in power levels in the game Guardsmen cant approach each situation the same way. Its a tough job to be in, when you are contemplating having to arrest a 50th level behemoth who is not known for his love of the law. (Imagine arresting Billiam....) But that is part of the job potentially...

Speaking as someone who has had to at least try to arrest Billiam that can get really interesting. But then Grim has tried to arrest at least one god.

Also, as was previous mentioned re: the guard's competency, we're at the mercy of skill calls like contacts and such a lot of the time, so even when we catch the crook or have a suspect (And we generally do), sometimes they've got enough political protection or other protection to mean they get away with it. That said: sometimes they don't, and the guard does put in legwork enough to nail people who use a bunch of skills at times, simply by talking to enough people and narrowing down the suspect list. And sometimes we just arrest a random criminal until his buddies fess up or give the stuff back, it depends on the circumstances.

As for the recruitment bit, we'll keep working on that, beyond the stuff dave mentioned there's always the issue of people coming and going from the LARP. You gain and lose players as they go through stages in their life, so our group is in a state of flux, and we try not to keep travance as a total armed camp with nothing but yellow and gold.

Mechanical Point... in MMO's, when you die, you lose XP or item durability. Except when PvP occurs. XP (& maybe Item Durability) don't get affected. Can we institute a system in KR in that when you die from NPC or Plot... you lose the life tag. But if you die due to PvP, you don't lose the life tag. This makes the loss or death of a character less painful & crippling.

How would people feel about that?

That leads to a certain difficulty when it comes to "treat NPCs as PCs." With few exceptions, MMO NPCs are definitely distinct from PCs. However, there are many NPCs at LARPs that seem as fleshed out as a PC - look at Gus' Captain Gem.

I get where you're coming from, but I feel like it would weaken the game to do such. Also, the player that died might genuinely not know if it was a PC or NPC that did it. If Chris Zipeto's character kills you, how are you supposed to know if it's an NPC or yet another alt, y'know?

Well, PvP is supposed to be heavily regulated, & much like cabin raiding... a marshal is supposed to be present. So when a PvP action happens, the Marshal can tell you that you don't go through the Phokus like normal & you don't lose the tag. This also should prove it was or was not a PvP death and therefore you died due to a PC killing you. This also leads to a better trail for IG ramifications when the Guard does their CSI tracking thing to find the culprit and handle the IG issue.

One other thing- please PLEASE have an RM. It is so very frustrating when we have skills that SHOULD work (tracking, scrying, etc) that cant because OOG we literally have no idea where we are going and after who.

Dennis Brand wrote: 2) The Guard needs to investigate said reporting, not just brush it off or ignore it (as I have seen done on MANY occasions)

Phone lines are open and operators are standing by!

Vigilante group LFM, bring your own rope :)

The world is a crappy place, people have been stabbed over a few dollars. Sentient beings are a threat not only in our world but in Travance as well, shooting for realism, there's no way to flag yourself for PVP in the real world.

Fenri Kantaris wrote: ... shooting for realism...

There are elves... in the woods... throwing fireballs.

I'm pretty sure we can take a few other liberties with regards to realism.

I meant realism within KR in regards to interacting with people.

We can't all play carebears, some people just want to watch the world burn, some people know that you can be pulled through the Phokus and want to teach a lesson to someone by making them take that trip (and hope that Soul Harvesters get to them first).

If I, as Mike, were to go out and steal someones computer I would most certainly expect to get stabbed or beat up or something, those consequences should apply for Fenri as well.

Fenri Kantaris wrote: If I, as Mike, were to go out and steal someones computer I would most certainly expect to get stabbed or beat up or something, those consequences should apply for Fenri as well.

I think by the way that KR defines things, stealing someone's computer IS PVP. So if you want to play that kind of character, you would have to be flagged for PVP.